IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR NO.756 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: February 12, 2007 Deepak Dawar ….Petitioner VERSUS Pooja Dawar ….Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL PRESENT: Shri D.D.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Viney Mittal,J.(Oral). The husband is petitioner before this Court. He is aggrieved against the order passed by the trial Judge, whereby on an application filed by the respondent wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a maintenance amount of Rs.1,500/- per month has been fixed alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not find any justification that the amount of maintenance fixed by the trial Court is excessive in any manner. There is absolutely no justification to interfere in the revisional jurisdiction of this Court. Dismissed. February 12, 2007 (Viney Mittal) KD Judge