IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.950 of 2007 DHIRAN MAHTO Versus PUNAM DEVI @ PUJA DEVI ----------- 2. 25.8.2008 Heard counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court an amount of Rs. 1000/- for the wife and Rs. 1000/- for the minor child by way of adinterim maintenance cannot be said to be either excessive or illegal. Counsel for the petitioner had stressed on the aspect that the petitioner had no source of income and yet the court below has fixed the exorbitant amount. Unfortunately, such submission of the counsel for the petitioner does not match with the case of the parties before the court below. In para 8 the lady has clearly asserted the fact that the petitioner had an income of Rs. 1,50,000/- per annum from both employment as also Kirana business. This fact within the knowledge of the petitioner under section 106 of the Evidence Act was to be rebutted by the petitioner by making a specific denial. However, in para 10 of the written statement a mere denial was made and in fact the onus was shifted on the applicant, the wife, saying that she also was working as a Mazdoor and therefore, was having income and as such, the petitioner was not liable to maintain the 2 wife and the child, which according to him was a illegitimate and not born out of the marriage with the petitioner. That being so, this Court would not find any reason to interfere because the facts having not been controverted by the petitioner he cannot disown the liability of wife and child specially when the court below in the impugned order has also considered and rejected the submissions with regard to absence of relationship between the petitioner and his wife and child. There being thus no merit in this application, it is accordingly dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to pay both arrears and current amount under the impugned order within a period of one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, failing which the court below will be at liberty to take suitable coercive measures against the petitioner for realization of the amount of maintenance. ( Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/