Anu Thapar vs Deep Thapar on 17 December, 2009

C.R. No. 176 of 2009                                              [1]




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

                               CHANDIGARH.

                                C.R. No. 176 of 2009

                                Date of Decision: December 17, 2009



Anu Thapar

                                       .....Petitioner

             Vs.

Deep Thapar

                                       .....Respondent


CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

                         -.-

Present:-    Mr.Ashwani Talwar, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Ms. J.J. Kaur, Advocate
             for the respondent.

                   -.-



M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)

Wife has filed this petition against the order dated September

29, 2008 allowing her application under Section 24 of the Hindu marriage

Act only to the extent of granting her interim maintenance at the rate of

Rs.1300/- per month and Rs.3000/- as litigation expenses in a petition for

divorce filed by the respondent- husband.

C.R. No. 176 of 2009 [2]

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the matrimonial

advertisement, the respondent had specifically mentioned that his salary was

five figures. In support of his submission, he has relied upon the

advertisement dated June 18, 2005.

Counsel for the respondent has contended that on account of

the behaviour and conduct of the petitioner, the husband had to loose his job

and that at present he is getting a sum of Rs.2200/- only as stipend by

working with J.B.Sagar.com and that it has further been argued that at

present he is not doing any job. It has also been submitted that the wife

herself is earning a sum of Rs.5000/- per month by teaching.

After hearing counsel for the parties and taking into

consideration the qualification of the defendant- respondent i.e. he is MSc.

IT and had declared his income to be in five figures, the amount of

Rs.1300/- per month awarded, on the face of it, appears to be unreasonably

low. Though the scope of interference in the exercise of revisional

jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is very limited but

in circumstances where unreasonableness is apparent on the face of record,

the jurisdiction can be exercised, in the interest of justice.

Without expression of any opinion on the income of the

respondent- husband, it is sufficient to observe that with qualification of

M.Sc.IT to his credit and with his capability and capacity to earn in five

figure income and the respondent being an able bodied person, a respectable

amount of interim maintenance can be awarded,. The petitioner will be

entitled to a sum of Rs.2000/- per month as interim maintenance from the
C.R. No. 176 of 2009 [3]

date of her application. She will get litigation expenses of Rs.10000/-

instead of Rs.3000/- awarded by the trial Court.

The impugned order is hereby modified as mentioned,

hereinabove.

Disposed of.

December 17, 2009                                  (M.M.S.BEDI)
 sanjay                                              JUDGE