In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 4344 of 2007 Date of decision: August 25, 2009 Gurpreet Kaur .. Petitioner Vs. Harapreet Singh .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. O.P. Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J This petition is directed against the order dated 25.7.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ropar, whereby during the proceedings of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the application of the petitioner-Gurpreet Kaur (herein referred as 'the petitioner') under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, was allowed and she was granted pendente lite maintenance to the tune of Rs.1,000/- per month and a sum of R.3,000/- on account of litigation expenses. However, nothing was awarded to the minor child. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred this petition. I, uphold the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial court while awarding maintenance to the petitioner @ Rs.1,000/- per month did not record any observations regarding maintenance to be awarded to the minor. The maintenance of Rs.1000/- per month so awarded is not stated to include the maintenance of the minor. Notwithstanding the fact that the divorce petition has been decided, but the learned Additional District Judge was bound to consider the maintenance of the minor at the time of considering the maintenance of the petitioner as the minor was also bound to be maintained by the respondent during the period the application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act remained pending in the court. Civil Revision No. 4344 of 2007 -2- *** As such, the order passed by the Lower Appellate Court is rendered illegal to that extent and needs re-consideration. Under these circumstances, this petition is accepted, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the trial court with a direction to re-consider the entitlement of maintenance payable to the minor during the pendency of the divorce petition. August 25, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge