Vikas Tayal v. Sonia

VINOD KUMAR 2015.01.13 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No.111 of 2015 [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CR No.111 of 2015 Date of decision:08.01.2015 Vikas Tayal

...Petitioner

Versus

Sonia

...Respondent

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. D.N.Ganeriwala, Advocate, for the petitioner.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

This petition is against the order dated 25.11.2014 by which maintenance pendente lite has been fixed @ `12,000/- per month from the date of application till the disposal of the main petition and `15,000/- as the litigation expenses.

Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned Court below has wrongly assessed the income of the petitioner as `3,23,329/- because his net income is `2,33,794/-.

In this regard, he has reproduced a chart of computation of his income for the financial year 2013-14 from which it is found that the taxable income of the petitioner is `2,33,794/-, otherwise his gross income is `3,23,329/-, out of which `89,535/- is deducted under Section 80(C) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 out of which the petitioner has invested `60,000/-

VINOD KUMAR 2015.01.13 09:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CR No.111 of 2015 [ 2 ] ***** in the PPF account and the remaining amount as premium of the life insurance policies.

In view thereof, there is hardly any error in the order of the Court below which warrants any interference by this Court in this revision petition.

Dismissed.

January 08, 2015 ( Rakesh Kumar Jain ) vinod* Judge