CRP 313/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the opposite party despite service. The petitioner husband by the present petition is challenging the order dated 12.08.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Dibrugarh, in Misc.(J) Ca se No.128/2010 arising out of Title Suit (Restitution) No.32/2010, whereby and w hereunder an application filed by the present opposite party/wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of pendentilite maintenance and the litig ation expenses was allowed. The present petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal right, which was registered as T.S.(R) No.32/2010 in the Court of the learned District Judge, Dibrugarh. In the said p roceeding the opposite party wife filed an application under Section 24 of the H indu Marriage Act for grant of pendentilite maintenance as well as the litigatio n expenses contending inter alia that though the petitioner husband has the mont hly income of about Rs.35,000/- and she does not have any income, nothing has be en paid to her for her maintenance. The said application was objected by the pre sent petitioner by filing objection denying the claim of the opposite party wife that his monthly income is between Rs.30,000/- to Rs.35,000/-. The learned District Judge vide order dated 12.08.2011 taking the denial of the present petitioner husband about his monthly income of Rs.30,000/- to Rs .35,000/-, as admission directed payment of Rs.6,000/- per month as pendentilite maintenance apart from directing payment of Rs.15,000/- towards the litigation expenses. Referring to the written objection filed against the prayer made in the application under Section 24 of the Act, it has been submitted by the learned co unsel for the petitioner that in paragraph 11 of the said objection the petition er in fact denied the allegation of the opposite party wife that his monthly inc ome is between Rs.30,000/- to Rs.35,000/-, which was wrongly taken as admission by the learned District Judge while passing the impugned order. Perusal of the objection filed by the petitioner against the application under Section 24 of the Act reveal that in fact the petitioner has denied the a verments made by the opposite party wife that the his income is between Rs.30,00 0/- to Rs.35,000/-. The petitioner, however, has admitted that he is a businessm an and his father is an L.P. School teacher. The learned Court below, as noticed above, has passed the impugned order on the basis that the petitioner has admitted his monthly income to be Rs.30,00 0/- to Rs.35,000/- though he in fact denied such contention of the opposite part y wife in paragraph 11 of the objection as noticed above. The petitioner, howeve r, has admitted that he is a businessman. There is also no denial that the oppos ite party wife has no income. Considering the entire facts and circumstances and the requirement of la w that maintenance is to be awarded on the basis of the income of the husband, i n my considered opinion monthly pendentilite maintenance to the tune of Rs.4,000 /- would be the appropriate amount. Accordingly it is directed that the petition er shall pay the monthly pendentilite maintenance of Rs.4,000/- to the opposite party with effect from the month of August, 2010 (month of filing the applicatio n under Section 24 of the Act) apart from the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.15,000/-. The petitioner shall pay the arrear maintenance amount and litigation ex penses within 2(two) months from today by depositing the same in the Court of th e learned District Judge, Dibrugarh, which shall forthwith be released to the op posite party. The amount, if any, already paid shall be adjusted. The petitioner , however, shall continue to pay the current maintenance as awarded by this orde r in first week of every month. The order dated 12.08.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Dibruga rh, accordingly stands modified to the extent as indicated above. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of.