IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.R. No. 3863 of 2011 Date of decision: 3.6.2011 Puvvala Giridhar … Petitioner versus Janaki Puvvala Giridhar ... Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR Present: Mr. Ajay Pasricha, Advocate, for the petitioner ... ARVIND KUMAR, J: The present petitioner is the husband. He filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by way of a decree of divorce. During the pendency of the petition, the respondent-wife moved an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of maintenance pendente- lite for herself and baby girl born out of the wedlock. The Family Court vide order dated 31.1.2011 granted maintenance pendente-lite of Rs.15,000/- per month to them from the date of filing of the application till decision along with Rs.2500/- as litigation expenses. The husband has now filed the present revision petition. The main stress of the counsel for the petitioner-husband is that the respondent-wife has also an independent earning from agriculture to the tune of Rs.30,000/- per annum and he has annexed the agriculture income certificate to this effect. This will not help the petitioner in any manner. It is the income of the sale proceeds of paddy without any reference as to what expenses had been borne by her in relation to seeds, fertilizer, water, labour etc. and if that aspect is taken into consideration, she would hardly be left with anything. On the contrary, the net salary of the husband has been assessed to be Rs.43,941/- per month. The respondent- wife has to maintain herself and the minor daughter. The object of the provisions being to prevent vagrancy and destitution, has to be find out as to C.R. No. 3863 of 2011 -2- what is required by the wife to maintain a standard of living which is neither luxurious nor penurious; but is modestly consistent with the status of the family. In this back-drop of the facts, the amount of maintenance pendente- lite of Rs.15,000/- is not excessive and does not call for any interference. Revision petition is dismissed. June 03, 2011 ( ARVIND KUMAR ) JS JUDGE