: 1 : cwp-1379-11=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1379 OF 2011 Vikramsing S/o. Dr. Pratapsing Thakur .. Petitioner v/s. Smt. Roopa W/o. Vikramsing Thakur .. Respondent ......... Mr. J.H. Ramgude for the petitioner Mr. Akshay shinde h/f A.M. Kulkarni for the respondent ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATE : 5th APRIL, 2011 P.C. : 1. The petitioner herein filed Petition in the Family Court at Pune for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent being Petition P.A. No.914 of 2009. The respondent herein filed an application for interim maintenance at Exh.11. The learned Judge of the Family Court has decided the said application by order dated 1st January, 2011. The petitioner is directed to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs.20,000/- w.e.f. 2nd January, 2010 till the disposal of the petition. This order is challenged by the petitioner by this writ petition. : 2 : cwp-1379-11=.sxw 2. The respondent applied for conveyance charges to come from Bidar to attend to the case at Pune. The said application is at Exh.13. Learned Judge of the Family Court has by order dated 29th September, 2010 granted a sum of Rs.2,500/- per trip. This order is also challenged by the petitioner by this writ petition. 3. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as for the respondent at the stage of admission. The order regarding maintenance dated 1st January, 2011 is passed after taking into consideration the sum of Rs.62,000/- and odd which is being received by the petitioner after deduction. It was argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has to maintain his parents. So far as this aspect is concerned, no doubt, in the reply the petitioner has stated that he has to take care of his parents however, detailed particulars as to in what way he has to take care for his parents is not mentioned. As a result of that, learned Judge of the Family Court has declined to accept the stand of the petitioner. It is also argued that petitioner has to spend money for his housing loan and for his leave and licence fees. The petitioner has to bare the burden of maintenance for his wife and looking to the status of the petitioner, the respondent has been granted maintenance. It is to be noted that if the petitioner is earning every month a sum of Rs.60,000/- and odd amount, surely, he must have saved substantial : 3 : cwp-1379-11=.sxw amount and he must be drawing returns on the said amount which in fact not been considered in detail by the learned Judge of the Family Court. 4. In my view, the learned Judge of the Family Court has considered the need of the respondent in the proper perspective, of course, based on the income of the petitioner and has rightly fixed the quantum of maintenance @ Rs.20,000/- per month. 5. In so far as the conveyance charges are concerned, the respondent is staying at Bidar in the State of Karnataka. The respondent will have to undertake train journey, necessarily the respondent will have to stay at Pune for one night in order to attend the matter at Pune. Hence, a sum of Rs.2,500/- fixed by the learned Judge of the Family Court as conveyance charges is right as the respondent will have to spend some charges on lodging and boarding and some amount on travel expenses. If necessary she must have to get escort with her. Hence, sum of Rs.2,500/- granted by order dated 29th September 2010 is rightly arrived at. To that extent no interference is required. In view of the above, no interference is required in the impugned order. The petition is required to be dismissed at the stage of admission. Hence, following order is passed. : 4 : cwp-1379-11=.sxw ORDER (i) The petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)