:1: :1: :1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6347 OF 2007 A L O N G W I T H CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 510 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6347 OF 2007 Shri Pramod Yashwant Sonawane ...Petitioner Versus Pradnya Pramod Sonawane ....Respondent ====== Ms.Smita Gaidhani, Adv. for the petitioners. Ashutosh Gole i/by. Mr. N.R. Bubna Adv. for the respondent. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 27TH FEBRUARY,2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : 1. This Writ petition under Article of the 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Malegaon in Hindu Marriage Petition No.54 of 2006. :2: :2: :2: 2. The order under challenge is regarding the interim maintenance. By the order under challenge, the Civil Judge Senior Division has directed the petitioner-husband to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- per month to the wife from the date of the application. 3. The petitioner challenges this order on the ground that the learned Judge has failed to appreciate the fact that both the Husband and Wife are Doctors by profession. The contention is that the wife is also earning, inasmuch as, she is employed. Further during the course of the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., the Wife has maintained that she can and is capable of earning more than the Husband. Further, the Husband’s Annual Income is Rs.37,000/- and his monthly income is around Rs.3,000/-. Therefore, he should not be directed to pay Rs.2,000/- per month. 4. From the perusal of the petition and the Annexures thereto, so also, the impugned order it is apparent that the Learned Judge has not been shown any proof with regard to the income of the Wife. Even today, the :3: :3: :3: Husband has merely given some figures but states that he is ready and willing to furnish documents evidencing her employment and income. 5. This is not a court of further appeal. Further, at the interim stage the quantum of Rs.2,000/- has been determined as interim maintenance. This court cannot re-appreciate the materials at the prima-facie stage and merely because another conclusion is possible, interfere with the impugned order. In such circumstances, it is not possible to entertain this petition. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the Trial Court for variation or modification of the impugned order and such an application, if preferred, should be decided uninfluenced by the observations made earlier and by applying its mind to such material as is produced at that stage. Granting liberty to the petitioner to move for variation and/or modification of the interim order, this petition is disposed off. 6. I am informed that the petitioner has deposited in this court a sum of Rs.34,000/-. The respondent-wife :4: :4: :4: is at liberty to withdraw the sum. The petitioner needless to state should pay the sum as awarded, until, the Application for modification or variation of the interim order is disposed off. Petition disposed off. No order as to costs. 7. As the Writ Petition itself is disposed off, the Civil Applicaiton does not survive. SD/- ********