High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCR/2802/2018dismissed

Priyanka Bhutani And ANR v. Vishal Narain

2018-05-01Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Verma2 pages

C.R. No.2802 of 2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.2802 of 2018 Date of Decision.01.05.2018 Priyanka Bhutani ......Petitioner Vs Vishal Narain .....Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for Mr. Bhim Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J.(ORAL) The present revision petition is directed against the order whereby maintenance pendente lite to the minor child @`15,000/- per month in divorce petition filed by the petitioner has been granted. Mr. Nonish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that in the divorce petition filed by the petitioner, an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act claiming maintenance pendente lite was moved on the premise that respondenthusband is working Vice President of a company and drawing salary of `2,50,000/-. It was categorically stated that the petitioner was working as Assistant Professor and drawing a net salary of `59,000/- per month whereas the gross salary was `70,000/-. The trial Court had awarded a sum of `15,000/- per month for upkeep and maintenance of the minor child, which is not according to the status of the parties, thus, urges for enhancement of the same.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and appraised the paper book. Both the husband and wife are working but it is unfortunate that PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.05.03 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R. No.2802 of 2018 -2they are at loggerheads and are in the Court after 10 years of marriage as the marriage was performed on 26.02.2006. The amount of maintenance pendente lite @`15,000/- per month fastened upon the husband, in my view, cannot be said to be meager amount as the petitioner is also working. Both the working parents are duty bound to maintain and upkeep the child. In view of the aforementioned, I do no find any illegality and perversity in the order under challenge as the same cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction. The revision petition is dismissed. (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE May 01, 2018 Pankaj* Whether reasoned/speaking Yes Whether reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.05.03 12:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document