IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 167 of 2011 Date of decision: 23.5.2011 Ajay Kumar ….Petitioner. Versus Pooja Gupta ….Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner: Mr. K.R.Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents: None. Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. This petition is directed against the order of the learned District Judge whereby he has ordered that the petitioner-husband should pay pendente lite monthly maintenance of Rs.3000/- per month and also pay litigation charges to the respondent. 2. Shri K.R.Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner, urges that there is no proof to show that the husband owns any shop. According to him both the shops in the Bawa Market are run by the father of the petitioner and he has no independent source of income. It is also urged that the respondent-wife is running a beauty 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 parlour in one of the shops owned by her father in New Shimla. 3. At the stage of grant of ad-interim injunction the applications are decided only on the basis of the affidavits and it is not necessary to record evidence. The case of the petitioner- husband that he has nothing to do with the shops cannot be believed. Admittedly, he is the only son of his father and two shops are being run in Bawa Market. The amount awarded is just and reasonable calling for no interference. Hence, the petition is rejected. No costs. 23rd May, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) ™ Judge