Civil Revision No.1592 of 2008 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.1592 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: July 14, 2009. Jaswant Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Kamlesh ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri J.P. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): This order shall dispose of Civil Revisions No.1679 of 2009 and 1592 of 2008 as both have arisen out of the order dated 4.2.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Narnaul, granting ad-interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month. While the husband has approached this Court seeking reduction in the ad-interim maintenance, the wife seeks modification to make it applicable from the date of filing of the main petition/date of application for grant of interim maintenance. It is quite an unfortunate case where the husband and wife are at the loggerheads at an old age when they need to spend time together and share each other's feelings and sentiments. It appears that the marriage was solemnized in late 70s or early 80s and a female child was borne out of the wedlock. The girl child born out of the wedlock is now married and settled Civil Revision No.1592 of 2008 -: 2 :- in her own matrimonial home. The wife has now moved an application under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 for the grant of maintenance, inter-alia, alleging that the petitioner-husband is running the business of property dealer and has thrown her out of the matrimonial home and is presently putting up with another woman at Gurgaon. The petitioner-husband has refuted those allegations and shown inclination to join the company of the respondent-wife who, on the other hand, has turned down the same for the reason that the petitioner is allegedly living with another woman. Be that as it may, the solitary question to be considered by this Court is as to whether or not the maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- is on the higher side and does it warrant any interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction? In my considered view, if one takes into consideration the wholesale price index and the cost of living in this era of high prices, the amount of Rs.5,000/- is barely sufficient for basic sustenance. No interference in the impugned order, therefore, is called for. The learned trial court, however, shall not be influenced by the amount of interim maintenance at the time of final disposal of the application and shall determine the maintenance on the basis of the evidence to be led by both the parties. As regards the accompanying revision petition filed by the wife, she may approach the learned trial court for such a clarification/modification, if so desired. Disposed of. Dasti. July 14, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge