IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 8147 of 2010 Date of decision: 1.8.2011 Dr.Rajesh Kumar Mittal … Petitioner versus Sonia … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. GPS Bal, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. S.C.Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner is the husband. Respondent-wife filed petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage. She filed an application under Section 24 of the Act ibid for grant of maintenance pendente-lite. The Court below has fixed monthly interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of application and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses. Hence, this revision. Heard. The only argument that has been addressed by the counsel for the petitioner is that the Court below has wrongly assessed his income at Rs.20,000/- per month. It has also been pointed out that the respondent-wife is staying in half portion of the house belonging to the present petitioner. Petitioner is a BAMS doctor and running his clinic in a back-ward area at Nilokheri (Karnal) and does not have the income so assessed by the Court below. A bare perusal of the income-tax returns for the years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10 indicates that petitioner's highest annual income of the last return is Rs.1,17,250/-. The argument of the counsel for the respondent-wife that he had not disclosed his actual income in the return C.R. No. 8147 of 2010 -2- cannot be accepted until and unless there is a concrete evidence to this effect, which however, is not available in this case. In this back-drop of the facts, the maintenance pendente-lite at the rate of Rs.10,000/- is certainly on the excessive side and as such, the same stands reduced to Rs.7000/- per month from the date of application. The revision petition stands partly allowed in the manner indicated above. August 1, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE