IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2707/2009 Date of decision: 23.05.2011. Amrita Randhawa ....................Petitioner v. Amrik Singh Randhawa .....................Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.Ranjan Lakhanpal,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Arvind Kashyap,Advocate for the respondent. Jaswant Singh.J.(Oral) Petitioner wife has filed the instant revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the order dated 12.5.2008 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh whereby on her application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in a petition for divorce filed by respondent/husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, she has been granted maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.12,000/- per month for the maintenance of wife. It is stated that the petitioner and respondent have been enjoying a high standard of life and their children- two school going daughters who are residing with the petitioner- are also used to live in the same standard. It is further submitted that respondent owns large number of properties and at present managing Dara Studio at Mohali. It is thus, submitted that the amount of maintenance awarded by the learned trial court is on lower side. The respondent husband in his written statement has denied the averments made in the petition and states that his total income, as per income tax return produced before the trial Court, is Rs.2.5 lacs per annum and thus the maintenance awarded is sufficient. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book carefully. The impugned order granting maintenance pendente lite to the petitioner wife was passed three years back i.e. on 12.5.2008. Since then the cost of living has risen manifold. In the absence of latest income tax returns, it cannot be presumed that the income of the respondent husband is stagnant and has not increased with the passage of time. It is also not disputed that the two school going daughters are also residing with the petitioner wife and thus it cannot be believed that she is not spending even a single penny on them out of maintenance awarded to her. It is also not disputed that while passing the impugned order, the learned trial court has not taken care of the day to day expenses of the daughters of the petitioner. After considering these facts as well as social status of the petitioner wife and respondent husband, I am of the opinion that it would be just and fair to grant maintenance pendente lite to the petitioner wife @ Rs.20,000/- per month instead of Rs.12,000/- per month as awarded by the trial court. Ordered accordingly. The enhanced compensation shall be payable to the petitioner wife from the date of application. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. 23.05.2011 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge