1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR F.A.NO.7 OF 2008. Uday Baliramji Dhakate ...vs.. Suchita Uday Dhakate =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Orders =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- C ORAM : C.L.PANGARKAR, J. DATED : 15th September, 2009. 1. Heard Mr.T.B.Pantawane, learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal has been preferred against the order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) on an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 3. A petition has been filed for restitution of Conjugal Rights by the appellant. The respondent 2 appeared in the said petition and filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act claiming interim maintenance during the pendency of the said petition. 4. The respondent had contended that she should be paid maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month for herself and for her daughter and Rs.5500/- towards litigation expenses. 5. After having considered the submissions made before the learned judge, he found that the salary of the present appellant was Rs.8425/- and awarded Rs.1500/- to respondent-wife and Rs.750/- to the daughter. He also directed Rs.3500/- to be paid to respondents towards litigation expenses. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the amount that is awarded is excessive since after deduction the appellant gets Rs.896/- only as take home salary and therefore he cannot pay the amount as directed. The submission has no force. The court is not concerned with the deductions. What is required to be seen is the income of the appellant. Considering the income of the appellant , that is more than Rs.8000/- per month, the maintenance awarded by the court below does not appear to me 3 to be excessive at all. There is no reason to interfere with the order. The appeal is dismissed in limine. JUDGE. chute