-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3540 OF 2008 Nayana Sudhir Gobbur .. Petitioner. V/s. Sudhir Shrikant Gobbur .. Respondent. --- Mr.J.M.Sidhwa i/by Manoj Bhatt for the Petitioner. Mr. A.G. Damale for the Respondent. ----- CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. CORAM : R. V. MORE, J. DATED : 16TH JULY, 2008. DATED : 16TH JULY, 2008. DATED : 16TH JULY, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Mr.Sidhwa, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Atul Damale Advocate for the respondent no.1. 2. This is the wife’s petition to enhance the amount of interim maintenance. By the impugned order, the Judge of the Family Court, Mumbai granted to the petitioner an amount of Rs. 5000/- per month in addition to the school fees of her daughter towards interim maintainence. The original proceedings are filed by the petitioner for divorce on the ground of cruelty. During the pendency of this petition, the application for interim maintainence came to be filed and as stated above, the petitioner was granted Rs.5000/- towards maintainence. Admittedly, the -: 2 :- respondent husband is earning Rs.49,000/- per month. The petitoner wife is also admittedly earning an amount of Rs. 21,000/- per month by way of gross salary. In addition to the above, admittedly, the respondent husband transfered to the petitioner’s account Rs. 30,00,000/-. (Rs.thirty lakhs). There is no dispute that this amount is utilised by the petitioner for purchasing a flat. Over and above, the petitioner wife is also getting an amount of Rs.2,800/- by way of rent from the another flat. In my considered view, the Judge of the Family Court considered the income of the respective parties and thereafter, passed the impugned order. I do not find any perversity or illegality in the approach adopted by the learned Judge of the Family Court. 3. The petition is devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed. ( R.V. MORE, J.) .....