IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.310 of 2007 SURENDRA YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 8. 04.09.2008 This application has been filed against the order dated 18.12.2006 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gopalganj in Misc. Case No. 410 of 2002 Tr. No. 402 of 2006 whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 1000/- to the Opposite Party No. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 only on quantum of maintenance. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no means to pay Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance. He himself is below poverty line. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 submitted that the petitioner has agriculture land and his annual income is more than one lac. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the marriage between the parties is admitted. The petitioner is a labourer. Apart from income from agriculture he has no other income. - 2 - Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of view that the quantum of maintenance awarded by the court below requires interference. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 800/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 instead of Rs. 1,000/- (one thousand) per month. With above modification, this application is disposed of. Kundan (Ghanshyam Prasad, J.)