IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.632 of 2007 CHATURANAND JHA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 6. 10.9.2008. This application has been preferred against the order dated 4.1.2007 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnea in A. Misc. 4/2003, Trial No. 73 of 2006 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay enhanced maintenance of Rs.1000/- each to opposite party nos. 2 and 3. Heard learned counsel for both the parties. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the amount of maintenance awarded by the court below is quite excessive keeping in view the income of the petitioner. The petitioner is not able to pay the enhanced amount of maintenance. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that the income of the petitioner is more than 7500/- per month. The enhanced maintenance amount is actually not even sufficient to meet the bare needs of the opposite party. Opposite party no. 3 is a student of class X. Opposite party - 2 - no. 2 is spending heavy amount in the education of opposite party no.3. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. On perusal of the impugned order it is quite apparent that the enhanced maintenance amount is proportionate to the income of the petitioner. As per salary chart, the income of the petitioner is Rs.7557/- per month. Even after deduction of the deposits the petitioner gets Rs.5557 per month. Under the facts and circumstances, I find no valid ground to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. However, it is made clear that opposite party no. 3 shall be entitled to get maintenance at the enhanced rate till he attains the age of majority i.e. 18 years. kanchan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)