C.R.No.5341 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R.No.5341 of 2009 Date of Decision : 16.09.2009 Amit Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Bharti ...Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. N.L.Sammi, Advocate, for the petitioner. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed by the learned trial Court on 19.8.2009, whereby an application filed by the respondent-wife for grant of maintenance pendente lite, was allowed and Rs.2000/- per month was granted as maintenance to the wife and Rs.1000/- per month to the minor child, apart from litigation expenses of Rs.5500/-. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the order passed by the learned trial Court is cryptic, non-speaking and bereft of any reason, therefore, the same cannot be sustained. A perusal of the order does show that the learned trial Court has not given any reason why the maintenance allowances have been fixed at the rates awarded by the Court. However, keeping in view the contents of the application and the reply filed, I am of the opinion that the grant of maintenance at such rates is neither excessive nor unfair. In the application for grant of maintenance, the respondent-wife has pointed out that the present petitioner is carrying the business of C.R.No.5341 of 2009 2 gold-smith and earning Rs.10,000/- to 15,000/- per month. In reply, though the petitioner has stated that the applicant-wife is working as a Sales Manager and getting salary of Rs.10,000/- per month, but the fact that the petitioner is working in the shop of gold-smith and is earning Rs.10,000/- to 15,000/- has not been specifically denied. In view of the said fact, the award of maintenance at the rates given by the learned trial Court cannot be said to be unfair and unreasonable. In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the present revision. The same is dismissed. However, the learned trial Court is advised to be careful in future so as to give reasons in passing orders deciding lis between the parties. 16.09.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE