IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No. 07 of 2011 Jyotish Chandra ……… Revisionist. Versus Smt. Deveshwari ……… Respondent. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Advocate for the revisionist. None appears on behalf of the respondent. Date of Judgment: 14.03.2011 BARIN GHOSH, C.J. (ORAL) Despite notice, none appears on behalf of the respondent / wife. 2. On 1st September, 2003, maintenance of the wife of the revisionist was fixed by the Family Court at Rs. 2,100/-, taking into account the fact that the revisionist is required to look after the well-being and education of two of his sons, who were born out of the wedlock. In 2010, the respondent / wife filed an application, seeking enhancement of the maintenance to Rs. 6,000/-. While considering the application, the learned Family Judge proceeded on the basis as if the claim is for Rs. 8,000/-. After consideration of all the evidence on record, the learned Judge has concluded that the respondent / wife has been able to make out a case for enhancement. He, accordingly, by the order under challenge, granted enhancement to Rs. 8,000/-. 3. The reasons furnished for not to accede to the contention of the revisionist that no enhancement is called for, are not interfereable. The reasons are well-balanced, well-considered and legal. However, as aforesaid, while the claim was for Rs. 6,000/-, the award was given for Rs. 8,000/- without indicating any reason for enhancing the claim from Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 8,000/-. 4. That being the situation, the order is modified by directing enhancement of Rs. 6,000/-, instead of Rs. 8,000/-. The revision petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 14.03.2011 Amit