Jitender v. Kavita

CR No.8033 of 2016 (O&M) {1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CR No.8033 of 2016 (O&M) Date of decision:30.11.2016 Jitender ... Petitioner Vs.

Kavita ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present:- Mr. Jai Singh Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner.

AMIT RAWAL J. (Oral) Petitioner-husband is aggrieved of the impugned order dated 22.09.2016 (Annexure P-5), whereby, ad interim maintenance @ `5,000/- per month has ordered in a petition seeking divorce. Mr. Jai Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitionerhusband submits that awarding of maintenance pendent lite is too phenomenal as the petitioner is doing nothing, therefore, the compensation should have been assessed on the basis of daily wager which could not be more than `3,500/-.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner-husband and appraised the paper book and of the view that ad interim maintenance granted by the Court below is perfectly legal and justified on the basis of the affidavit filed before the Court below. The status of the parties have been taken care of.

Savita 2016.12.02 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

CR No.8033 of 2016 (O&M) {2} In view of the aforementioned observations, I do not find any illegality and perversity in the impugned order, much less the same cannot be said to have been passed without jurisdiction. Accordingly, the revision petition stands dismissed. (AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE November 30, 2016 savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Savita 2016.12.02 10:23 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh