C.R.No.1275 of 2011 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.1275 of 2011 Date of decision: 1.4.2011 Jagbir ….Petitioner Vs. Smt Kavita ….Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. V.D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Jaswant Singh, J Petitioner- husband has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution for setting aside the impugned order dated 12.1.2011 (P.1) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat whereby the application of the respondent-wife has been allowed and the petitioner-husband has been directed to pay Rs.4000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite i.e Rs.2500/- to the respondent-wife and Rs.1500/- to her minor daughter besides litigation expenses of Rs.6000/-. Facts of the case are that a Petition bearing No.50 dated 9.8.2010 was filed by the petitioner-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short “Act of 1955”) for dissolution of marriage by way of decree of divorce. During the pendency of the proceedings, application under Section 24 of the Act of 1955 was filed by the respondent- wife claiming a sum of Rs.12000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite to her and the minor daughter as well as a sum of Rs.25000/- as litigation expenses. Upon notice, the claim was opposed by the present petitioner on the ground that the respondent-wife had deserted the petitioner-husband C.R.No.1275 of 2011 #2# since 31.3.2010 without any cause by taking all her valuable. It is further stated that a female child was born out of the wedlock on 9.5.2009 and it is the respondent-wife, who left the residential house of her own sweet will. It is further stated that she is doing a tailoring work for ladies and earning more than Rs.7000/- per month and can easily maintain herself and the minor daughter. It is further stated that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground and is drawing a salary of Rs.7580/- and total emoluments are not more than Rs.10000/- and that he is to look after his old age mother and two younger brother, who are students of 10th and 12th classes respectively. After hearing both the parties, learned Family Court allowed the application and directed the petitioner-husband to pay Rs.4000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite i.e Rs.2500/- to the respondent-wife and Rs.1500/- to her minor daughter besides litigation expenses of Rs.6000/-. Hence the present petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned order is wholly erroneous and liable to be set aside as the petitioner is working as a Clerk in the office of Executive Enginner, Construction Division No.30 and his net salary is Rs.6057/- per month and he is to look after his entire family including his old mother and two younger brothers studying in 10th and 12th classes respectively. The respondent is earning about Rs.7000/- from the tailoring job and is well qualified and being M.A B.Ed, she is capable of earning her livelihood. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the paper book, this court does not find any merit in the present petition and the same deserves dismissal. C.R.No.1275 of 2011 #3# A perusal of salary certificate dated 18.1.2011 (P.4) reveals that the petitioner-husband is working as a Clerk and is getting total salary of Rs.11491/- and his basic pay is Rs.7850/-. It is also necessary to mention here that he is voluntarily contributing an amount of Rs.4000/- towards his GPF Fund. There is another Certificate dated 18.1.2011 issued by the Punjab National Bank to substantiate that the mother of the petitioner is getting an amount of Rs.5575/- per month as pensionary benefits. There is no dispute that a female child was born from the wedlock of the parties on 9.5.2009. who is residing with the respondent-wife. In the present case, it is the respondent-wife, who is maintaining and taking care of her minor daughter and the petitioner- husband being a regular government employee, who is regularly saving an amount of Rs.4000/- in his GPF Fund, is expected to contribute a reasonable amount towards maintenance of his wife and minor daughter. In my view, the learned Family Court has rightly awarded the amount of Rs.4000/- as maintenance pendente lite along with litigation expenses of Rs.6000/-. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, this Court finds no illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 12.1.2011 (P.1) passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat warranting interference under Article 227 of the Constitution. Dismissed. April 01, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE