IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM Nos. 6589-90-CII of 2011 in/and Civil Revision No. 7108 of 2010 Date of decision: March 09, 2011 Kusum .. Petitioner Vs. Rajesh @ Raju .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Madan Pal, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 21.5.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Karnal, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Both the parties are agreeable that the maintenance as awarded by the trial court under Section 125 Cr.P.C. may be treated as reasonable. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to move an application for varying the said order in view of the changed circumstances, if any. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, however, contended for some amount on account of litigation expenses be awarded to the petitioner for pursuing the litigation which the court has omitted to award. In the circumstances, this petition is partly accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is granted litigation expenses to the tune of `10,000/-. However, while dismissing the petition qua enhancement of the maintenance pendente lite, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an application afresh on the basis of changed circumstances, if any. March 09, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge