Crl. Revision No. 2788 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Revision No. 2788 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: January 12, 2010 Vinod Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Smt. Seema ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Ashish Handa, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Adish Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent. GURDEV SINGH, J. Heard. This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of 58 days' delay in filing the revision is supported by the affidavit of the petitioner. Keeping in view the sufficient cause mentioned in the application, delay in filing the revision is condoned. Main case The respondent was awarded interim maintenance of Rs. 2500/- per month, besides Rs. 2000/- as litigation expenses. Learned counsel for the petitioner has tired to challenge that amount on the ground that the family court has determined the income of the petitioner on the basis of assumption. In such like cases, the Court is bound to do some guess work as the husband never discloses his actual income. It is the admitted fact that the petitioner is running a shop of mobile repairs, for which he he paying Crl. Revision No. 2788 of 2009 2 rent of Rs. 5500/- per month. In these circumstances, the family court was right in assuming that he must be earning handsome income. The maintenance awarded to the respondent is just a meagre amount to make her both ends to meet. There is no ground to interfere with the impugned order. Revision petition is hereby dismissed accordingly. January 12, 2010 (GURDEV SINGH ) prem JUDGE