1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6882 OF 2008 Sanjay J.Phagnekar .. Petitioner. Vs. Meena Sanjay Phagnekar .. Respondent. Mr.R.S.Apte,Sr.Counsel i/b Vaibhav Patankar for the petitioner. Mr.Samir A.Vaidya with G.S.Vaidya for respondent no.1. Coram : D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 16TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This petition is directed against an order passed by the courts below by which the petitioner-husband has been directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to his ten years old daughter. Admittedly, his income, when the application was decided, was Rs.13,000/- p.m. Mr.Apte, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the court below while fixing the maintenance to be paid to the daughter did not take into consideration the income of the wife. I have perused the impugned orders. From perusal of the impugned order it is clear that even the income of the wife was taken into consideration by the court below. Having considered the admitted income of the petitioner-husband, in my opinion, the 2 amount of maintenance awarded by the court below cannot be stated to be disproportionate to his income. No ground, warranting interference by this court, is made out. Hence the petition is dismissed. Insofar as the demand of school fee receipts and medical bills, if any, of the child is concerned, it is open to the petitioner-husband to request the wife to hand them over for claiming reimbursement from his employer. If such a request is made, the respondent-wife to consider it sympathetically. The petition is dismissed. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)