C.R. No. 563 of 2009 1
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
...
C.R. No. 563 of 2009
Date of decision: February 2,2009
Himanshu son of late Shri D.D.Dembla
..Petitioner
Versus
Mrs. Urvashi wife of Himanshu
..Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg
Present: Mr. S.P.Chahar, Advocate
for the Petitioner.
...
Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.
This is husband’s revision petition challenging the impugned order
dated 17.10.2008 whereby in a petition under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, respondent/wife has been granted maintenance pendentelite at the
rate of Rs. 10000/- per month for her maintenance as well as for maintenance of
her daughter and further a sum of Rs. 11000/- has been granted towards
litigation expenses.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the
impugned order is erroneous as the respondent wife is well qualified and was
earning handsomely, whereas out of a gross salary of Rs. 25000/-, the husband
petitioner has to maintain his aged parents also and, therefore, the maintenance
pendentelite granted to the respondent is excessive and is liable to be set aside.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. I find no merit in this
petition.
Admittedly, the husband is earning Rs. 25000/- P.M. There is no
evidence on record to prove that the respondent-wife is earning any income. It is
also not disputed that the maintenance granted by the trial Court is for her
C.R. No. 563 of 2009 2
maintenance as well as of her daughter. Keeping in view the facts and
circumstances of the case, I find that the maintenance pendentelite granted to
the respondent is just and proper.
Dismissed.
February 2, 2009 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG)
nk JUDGE