[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL W.P.NO.9028 OF 2005 Sau.Anjali @ Premlata Dhananjay Dube ..Petitioner Vs. Shri.Dhananjaya Suryakant Dube ..Respondent ... Ms.Deepali Kale on behalf of Mr.P.N.Joshi advocate for Ptitioner None for the Respondent ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 DATE : JANUARY 21, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner-wife. None appears for the Respondent-husband though served. The petitioner-wife has challenged the order dated 14.7.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge S.D. Nasik whereby interim alimony of Rs.1500/- per month was granted to her. The petitioner had prayed for Rs.10,000/- per month hence, being dissatisfied by the quantum of amount of Rs.1500/- per month, this petition has been preferred. [-2-] 2. The petitioner has filed the suit for maintenance from the Respondent-husband. The petitioner-wife filed application for interim alimony before the Family Court. She has stated that she is unemployed and her son born from the respondent-husband is also in her custody. Her case is that her husband is having agricultural land and household property at Satana and her husband is working as contractor in Nasik Municipal Corporation and earns Rs.1 to 1.5 lakh per month. 3. The respondent has not denied that present petitioner is his legally wedded wife. However, it is his case that she gets financial assistance from her parents. According to the husband, she is employed in private sector and hence, she has sufficient means to maintain herself. Respondent-husband denied that he holds any agricultural land. According to him, the land belongs to his father and his name along with brothers and sisters appear in the record of rights. it is further stated that land is not agricultural land and that there is no evidence brought on record by the petitioner that the respondent is working as contractor with Nasik [-3-] Municipal Corporation. 4. It is pertinent to note that the husband had filed petition for divorce which came to be dismissed. Against that, he has preferred appeal before the High Court which is pending. The copy of the order in that proceedings shows that respondent was getting Rs.1000/- per month as interim alimony vide order dated 23.2.1999. The copies of income tax returns of the respondent for the year 2002-2003, 2003-2004 show his income for the assessment year 2003-04 is Rs.70,100/-. This income is shown from the business and profession. There is no income from any other source either from agricultural land or house property. Looking to all these facts, the learned Civil Judge S.D.Nasik by order dated 14.7.2005 directed the repsondent-husband to pay Rs.1500/- per month to the wife by way of interim alimony from the date of filing of the suit. There is no evidence brought on record by the petitioner that the respondent is working as contractor with Nasik Municipal Corporation. It is admitted fact that interim alimony of Rs.1000/- was being paid to the wife pursuant to the order of this Court dated 23.2.1999 [-4-] in the divorce proceedings. Looking to all these facts, interim alimony of Rs.1500/- per month to the wife cannot be said to be insufficient. Hence, the order dated 14.7.2005 does not call for any interference. Writ petition is rejected. However, looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, Sp.C.S.No. 4 of 2004 be heard and decided as far as possible by 31.12.2008. 5. Writ petition is disposed of. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]