IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Civil Revision No. 56 of 2007. Date of Decision: 1st January, 2008. Smt. Geetanjli …. Petitioner. Versus Sh. Jyoti Parkash ….. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud,Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Romesh Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vivek Singh, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. This revision has been instituted by the wife against the order of the learned District Judge in an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act praying for maintenance. The learned District Judge holds that the appellant has a meager income of 15,000/- per month and that the wife is earning Rs. 3,330/- per month, he therefore, proceeded to award maintenance to the extent of Rs. 1000/- per month both for the respondent as also for the minor daughter. The petitioner is now in revision against the order. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. I do not find that the reasoning adopted by 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - the learned District Judge can be sustained. The disparity in the income between the husband and wife is large. Not only this, the wife is also maintaining a minor daughter. Rs. 1000/- per month is nothing as compared to the cost of living and the expenditure which the wife has to incur on the education of the child. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the disparity between the income of both the husband and the wife is so less that an amount of Rs. 1000/- which has been fixed by the learned District Judge is on the higher side. He submits that this amount should not be increased and that the wife is liable and capable to look after herself. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the amount is very meager and Rs. 1000/- per month can hardly sustain the child who is studying in school and his expenses on books, school uniform and fees etc. I am in agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, respondent is earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and is not maintaining anybody as held by the learned District Judge. It is also undisputed before me that the child is studying in School. In these circumstances, I hold that the interest of justice will be met in case the petitioner is granted maintenance @ 2000/- per month till the final disposal of the petition. This amount, of course would be open to revision if circumstances so change. This revision is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Record of the learned trial court be sent back immediately. Needless to say that the learned District Judge will proceed with expedition, in the matter. 1st January, 2008. (Dev Darshan Sud), (cm) Judge. - 3 -