1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2303 OF 2009 Suresh Dattatraya Kamble .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents. Mr.R.Sathyanarayan for the petitioner. Mr.R.M.Patne A.G.P. for respondent no.1. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATED : 26TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.1. None for other respondents, though served. 2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. I have perused the impugned order. By this order the petitioner has been directed to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondent-wife towards interim alimony and Rs.1,500/- per trip towards conveyance charges. Admittedly, take home salary of the petitioner is Rs.16,250/-. Mr.Sathyanarayan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has a 2 mother, who is a widow, and he has to maintain her. He further submits that, the petitioner has taken loan and requires to pay instalment of Rs.3,650/- per month to the bank. He, therefore, submits that the maintenance awarded is on the higher side. I have perused the impugned order and other material on record. Having regard thereto, I am satisfied that the amount of Rs. 1,500/- towards conveyance deserves to be reduced to Rs. 1,000/-. Insofar as the maintenance amount is concerned, looking to the admitted income of the petitioner, I am not inclined to interfere with the same. Hence the petition is partly allowed. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to the respondent-wife towards interim maintenance, as per the impugned order, and Rs.1,000/- per trip to the respondent towards conveyance charges. Rule is, accordingly, made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)