Suraj Bhan v. Nirmala Devi

C.R. No.7381 of 2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No.7381 of 2018 Date of Decision.30.10.2018 Suraj Bhan ....Petitioner Vs Nirmala Devi

...Respondent

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

Present:

Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.

-.- AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL) The husband is the revision petitioner before this Court against the order dated 08.08.2018 whereby in a divorce petition filed by the wife, maintenance pendente lite @`5000/- per month along with litigation expenses of `4000/- has been awarded. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that one minor child is with the husband and therefore, he has to maintain him and incur expenses upon his upbringing. The wife has also filed litigation under Section 125 Cr.P.C as well as under Domestic Violence Act. The salary as assessed by the Court is not correct and therefore, maintenance pendente lite is liable to be reduced.

I am afraid the aforementioned argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is not sustainable as the petitioner is working as Supervisor, drawing a salary of `25,000/- per month. The factum of petitioner working as Supervisor and drawing a salary of `25,000/- has not been denied by way of affidavit, thus, the amount awarded as maintenance pendente lite cannot be PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.11.02 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

C.R. No.7381 of 2018 -2said to be erroneous or onerous.

I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Court below, much less, the same cannot be said to be passed without jurisdiction. No ground for interference is made out. The revision petition is dismissed.

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE October 30, 2018 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes Whether Reportable No PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.11.02 14:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document