Civil Revision No. 7671 of 2011 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 7671 of 2011 Date of decision. 13.12.2011 Prem Maini .... Petitioner Versus Smt. Saran Maini ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr.Sanjay Vij, Advocate for the petitioner. **** Vijender Singh Malik, J. This is a revision petition brought by Prem Maini, the husband under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 19.11.2011 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon, vide which the application of the respondent-wife under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been allowed granting maintenance pendente lite in a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of application and Rs.5000/- towards litigation expenses. It is an unfortunate case where senior citizens have come before the court seeking dissolution of their marriage. The divorce petition has been brought by the petitioner in which the respondent filed an application for maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. She Civil Revision No. 7671 of 2011 --2-- has claimed in the application that she has no source of income to maintain herself and her daughter named Megha, who is unmarried. She has claimed that petitioner, on the other hand, has very sound financial position and has income from various sources. She has, therefore, prayed for allowing Rs.50,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite for herself and her daughter Mehga. The application has been opposed by the respondent, who has claimed that his wife has invested a sum of Rs.48,19,500/- in Government bonds, which is yielding income of Rs.28,113/- per month. The wife is claimed to be a greedy and materialistic woman and the application is claimed to have been filed just to harass the petitioner and to extort huge money. She is claimed to have income from various sources. The petitioner is claimed to be a retired person. Hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Family Court Gurgaon allowed the application vide the impugned order. I have heard Mr. Sanjay Vij, learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record carefully. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Smt. Saran Maini, the respondent is a woman of means. According to him, she has got a very huge amount invested in tax free bonds of the government, which is yielding a good income to her. According to him, she is also providing consultancy services to Oxfam India wherefrom she is earning quite a good amount. He has also submitted that the petitioner is a retired person, who is having an income less than that of the respondent. He has Civil Revision No. 7671 of 2011 --3-- further submitted that Ms. Megha is though unmarried daughter of the parties yet she is herself earning Rs.30,000/.- per month. He has further submitted that in these circumstances, the respondent was not entitled to any amount as maintenance pendente lite. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the respondent has tried to conceal her income because learned Family Court examined her and she did not tell her income . He has also submitted that she has, thus, concealed her income and for this reason alone, she is not entitled to any amount as maintenance pendente lite. As is evident from the fact that the income of the respondent is from the bonds of the government, the respondent might not have been in a position to state her income while she was examined by the Family Court. The consultancy contract, which is said to be giving her quite good income is over on 27.06.2011. The husband has himself stated his income at Rs.40,000/- per month while making statement to the court. His own statement shows his income higher than the income of the respondent, which shows that the respondent is entitled to maintenance pendente lite. Admittedly Ms. Megha is the unmarried daughter of the parties. She is living with her mother. Responsibility to maintain unmarried daughter is on the father. There is nothing on the record to prima-facie show that Ms. Megha is in service and is getting Rs.30,000/- per month and is in a position to maintain herself. Civil Revision No. 7671 of 2011 --4-- In these circumstances, the amount awarded as maintenance pendente lite by learned Family Court, Gurgaon, cannot be said to be unjustified. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the same. Finding no merit in the revision petition, the same is dismissed. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 13.12.2011 dinesh