IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1308 OF 2010 Between: Smt. K. Sri Rekha .....PETITIONER AND Sri Vijay Krishna Kompella ....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1308 OF 2010 ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order, dated 22.02.2010, in I.A.No.625 of 2009, in O.P.No.413 of 2009, on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, whereunder and whereby, an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month was granted to the petitioner herein towards interim maintenance. 2. Petitioner herein is the wife of the respondent. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondent is working as a Software Engineer in United States of America; that he is getting Rs.4,70,000/- per month; and that granting interim maintenance at Rs.15,000/- per month is hardly sufficient to maintain the petitioner herein and therefore, he prays to enhance the interim maintenance and also to grant some amount towards legal expenditure to the petitioner. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contended that the respondent is getting only $4,294.26 per month, which is equivalent to Rs.2,01,830.22 ps. in Indian currency; and that after deducting loans taken for going to abroad, rent for staying in the house etc., he is getting only $530 per month, which is equivalent to Rs.35,000/- per month in Indian currency and hence, he prays to dismiss the revision petition. 5. No proof is filed before the trial Court to show that the respondent is getting only Rs.35,000/- per month. Though the petitioner is an Engineering graduate, she is not working anywhere. She has to depend upon her parents. At present she is staying with her parents. She has no other means to maintain herself as on today. Therefore, the respondent, who is the husband of the petitioner, is bound to pay to the petitioner a reasonable amount towards maintenance for her sustenance during the pendency of the Original Petition. But, the claim of the petitioner to enhance the interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,20,000/- per month is exorbitant and unreasonable, even if, the respondent is getting Rs.2,01,830.22 ps. per month. 6. The respondent is the best person to say about his salary particulars and income, which he is deriving from the job. That has not been done so. But, as seen from the document, he is getting not less than Rs.2,00,000/- per month. No doubt, some standard deductions have to be given. After deducting half of the amount for the purpose of meeting other expenditures of the respondent, it can be safely said that the respondent would be getting not less than Rs.1,00,000/- per month. In such a case, 1/3rd of the amount can be ordered to be paid towards maintenance to the petitioner. So, considering the status of both the parties, granting Rs.15,000/- per month is not sufficient for maintenance of the petitioner. Hence, an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month granted to the petitioner towards interim maintenance is enhanced to Rs.30,000/- per month. Similarly, an amount of Rs.15,000/- is granted towards legal expenditure to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J June 10, 2010 MD