Civil Revision No.2912 of 2007 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2912 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 06.03.2009 Poonam Awasthi .............Petitioner Vs. Rohit Awasthi ............Respondent Present: Mr. Harsh Bhungar, Advocate for Mr. Jagmohan Ghuman, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Salil Sagar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Smarth Sagar, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? -.- K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) C.M. No.7078-CII of 2008 Application allowed. Filing of certified copies of Annexures R-1 to R-2 is dispensed with and the documents are taken on record. C.M. No.7079-CII of 2008 Application allowed. Delay of 171 days in filing the civil revision is condoned. Civil Revision No.2912 of 2007 (O&M) 1. The revision is against an order determining interim maintenance @ Rs.2500/- for the wife and another Rs.2500/- already determined as maintenance payable to the son under Section 125 Civil Revision No.2912 of 2007 (O&M) -2- proceedings. The claim by the wife is for an enhancement on the ground that the husband is working in BSNL and that he is earning more than Rs.15,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the petitioner also seeks to produce before this Court Salary slip for September, 2008, which shows the gross income at about Rs.19,000/-. The learned counsel for the respondent refers to a salary slip for the month March, 2009 which shows the gross income as Rs.18,452/- and the net pay as Rs.14,326/-. Though not essentially a matter of law, the assessment has to be made which will accord with the relative status of the parties, reasonable needs of the wife and the paying capacity of the husband. The amount, which has been determined by the Court below already, accords with reasonable estimation and I do not think there is any error in the assessment made by the Court below. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent also contends that the house in which he is residing has been locked by the wife and he is not able to live at that property. Learned counsel for the petitioner takes exception to any observation made with reference to the same, having regard to the fact that there is a separate proceeding pending before the Court with regard to that issue. The revision petition is directed only against the interim order determining maintenance and I do not want to be detained which is not before me in this Court. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that respondent has not been regularly paying maintenance which was directed by the Court below, which fact is denied by learned counsel for the respondent. There is again no necessity to make any observation with regard to the same, since the law provides adequate Civil Revision No.2912 of 2007 (O&M) -3- remedy against the person, who is not paying the maintenance by giving the person a liberty to apply to the Court for stay or dismissal against an erring party before the Court where the matrimonial proceedings are pending. 4. The revision petition is disposed of in the above terms. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 06, 2009 Pankaj*