C.R.No.4457 of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.4457 of 2010 Date of Order: 21.3.2011 Neeru Bala .....Petitioner Vs. Mohan Lal .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Alka Chatrath, Advocate for the respondent. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) In the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, petitioner-wife has laid challenge to the impugned order dated 11.5.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ad hoc (Fast Track Court), Gurdaspur whereby on her application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”) she has been granted ad interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.1000/- per month w.e.f 1.1.2010 besides Rs.1500/- as litigation expenses to be paid by the respondent- husband. It is stated that the marriage of the parties was solemnized on 8.11.1993 at Rampura Mohalla Dalhousie Road, Pathankot as per hindu rites and out of their wedlock, a daughter, named Mansi was born on 26.9.1994 at Pathankot, which is allegedly living with the petitioner. Due to temperamental differences between the husband and wife, both of them have separately filed petitions under Section 13 of the Act. During the C.R.No.4457 of 2010 #2# pendency of the divorce petition, applicant-petitioner moved an application under Section 24 of the Act for grant of litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.10,000/- as well as maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.5000/- per month. Notice of the application was given to the non-applicant/respondent, who filed reply opposing the contents of the same. After hearing both the sides, learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur disposed of the application while directing the respondent- husband to pay Rs.1000/- per month as ad interim maintenance along with Rs.1500/- as litigation expenses to the petitioner-wife. Hence, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife for enhancement of the maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the learned Additional District Judge while passing the impugned order has not considered the fact that the petitioner is getting only Rs.2600/- per month whereas the respondent-husband is earning more than Rs.15000/- per month. It is further contended that the petitioner has to bear the expenses of her minor daughter aged around 16 years, who is also living with her and that the ad interim maintenance granted is on the very lower side and that too not from the date of filing the application. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-husband has opposed the petition stating that the petitioner is earning handsome salary while teaching in a reputed Convent School and that no infirmity can be found with the impugned order. After giving my anxious thought to the rival submissions, I find the claim of the petitioner-wife to be meritorious. It is not in dispute that C.R.No.4457 of 2010 #3# the respondent-husband is Government Employee in the office of National Hydro Electric Project, Chamba and is earning gross salary of Rs.15000/- per month. It is equally true that the respondent-husband is morally and legally bound to maintain his wife and minor child even if the wife has some source of earning. In my view, the interim maintenance i.e Rs.1000/- granted by the learned Additional District Judge appears to be on the lower side as undisputedly the minor daughter aged around 16 years is living with the petitioner, who has to bear all the expenses incurred upon her. I further find that the grant of maintenance pendente lite by the learned ADJ with effect from 1.1.2010 is without any basis and thus it is held that the same shall be admissible with effect from the date of the application under Section 24 of the Act. In view of the above discussion, present petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 11.5.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ad hoc (Fast Track Court), Gurdaspur is modified to the extent that the interim maintenance is enhanced to Rs.2000/- per month to be paid by the respondent-husband from the date of the application. March 21, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE