Civil Revision No.2052 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.2052 of 2008 Date of Order: 21.07.2009 Gurpreet Kaur ....Petitioner Versus Hardev Singh ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present: Mr.P.S.Paul Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Naresh Kaushal, Advocate for the respondent. RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral). The petitioner, who is the wife of the respondent prays that the order dated 23.02.2008, passed by the Additional District Judge, Rupnagar, be modified by enhancing the amount of maintenance awarded. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent is working in the United States of America, at a Filling Station and is earning $10,000 per month. He further submits that in response to the application for maintenance pendente lite, the respondent filed a reply but failed to disclose his income while admitting that he was working at a filling station. It is submitted that as the respondent has failed to deny his income of $10,000 per month, the amount of Rs.3000/- per month awarded by the trial court is highly inadequate and does not reflect the true measure of maintenance payable to the petitioner. Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the income as asserted by counsel for the petitioner is highly exaggerated. A petrol pump attendant cannot earn $10,000 per month even in the United States of America. It is submitted that the amount of Rs.3000/- awarded by Civil Revision No.2052 of 2008 -2- the trial court is just and proper. I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned order, the application for maintenance, the reply filed thereto. Maintenance, in my considered opinion is a measure of monetary comfort paid to a spouse to enable her to live with relative dignity and comfort, appropriate to her status. Admittedly, the respondent is working as a petrol pump attendant in the United States of America. He has despite filing a reply, failed to disclose his earnings. The allegation, by the petitioner that he earns $10,000 per month, however, appears to be highly exaggerated. It would be necessary to mention here that the amount awarded, if calculated in dollars is less than $50 a month. In my considered opinion, the maintenance awarded by the court below is woefully inadequate, as it is less than the minimum wage in Punjab. The interest of justice would be met, if the amount of maintenance is enhanced to Rs.6000/- per month, i.e. $102 per month from the date of the original application for maintenance. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. July 21, 2009 (RAJIVE BHALLA) nt JUDGE