IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.950 of 2006 SANJAY KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 6. 28.8.2008. This application has been preferred against the order dated 15th September,2006 passed by Principal Judge, Rohtas in Maintenance Case No.22 of 2004 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month to the opposite party no.2. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per finding of the lower court the income of the petitioner is Rs.2,000/- per month which in fact is not sufficient to meet the bare need of the petitioner and as such it is difficult for the petitioner to pay half of the income as maintenance to the opposite party no.2. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that quantum of maintenance granted by the court below does not require any interference. It is not sufficient to meet even bare ends of the opposite party. Considered the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the impugned order. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the court below has assessed the income of the petitioner at Rs.2,000/- per month. The petitioner is said to be daily wage earner. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances, I am of - 2 - N.H./ the view that the maintenance of Rs.1,000/- is heavy for the petitioner and accordingly, it requires to be interfered. In the result, this application is dismissed with modification in the quantum of maintenance. Petitioner is directed to pay maintenance of Rs.700/- per month from the date of order as directed instead of Rs.1,000/- per month. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )