Civil Revision No. 6300 of 2011 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 6300 of 2011 Date of decision. 17.10.2011 Jaswinder Singh Gill .... Petitioner Versus Suneeta ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK Present: Mr.Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. **** Vijender Singh Malik, J. Jaswinder Singh Gill, the respondent has brought this revision petition under the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 29.08.2011 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar whereby the application of Suneeta, respondent has been allowed awarding to her maintenance pendente lite at the rate of Rs.7000/- per month and litigation expenses in a sum of Rs.10,000/- in her application filed under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955( for short 'the Act'). Jaswinder Singh Gill, the petitioner has filed a petition for a decree of divorce under section 13 of the Act against his wife Suneeta. In the said proceedings, Suneeta had filed an application under section 24 of the Act for grant of maintenance pendente lite in a Civil Revision No. 6300 of 2011 --2-- sum of Rs.15,000/- and litigation expenses in a sum of Rs.20,000/-. She had claimed that she has no source of income while the petitioner is a teacher in Senior Secondary School at village Turna, District Jalandhar and his monthly income is not less than Rs.40,000/- per month. According to her, he also owns moveable and immovable property which fetches good income. Hence, she has made the aforesaid prayer. The application is opposed by the petitioner. According to him, the applicant is working as receptionist in a private clinic at Phillaur, and is doing stitching and tuition work and is earning Rs.13,000/- per month. According to him, she is not entitled to any maintenance. He has averred that he is drawing a salary of Rs.33,000/- per month, but out of this amount, a sum of Rs.6000/- is deducted towards GPF, Rs.1000/- towards LIC, Rs.3000/- towards income tax and Rs.12,000/- towards installment of bank loan. According to him, he also has to bear electric bills and conveyance expenses in a sum of Rs.4000/- per month and he is left with a sum of Rs.9000/- only out of his salary. Hearing learned counsel for the parties, learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, has allowed the application vide the impugned order awarding a sum of Rs.7000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has brought this revision petition. Civil Revision No. 6300 of 2011 --3-- I have heard Shri Vivek K. Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record carefully. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has taken home loan and he is paying Rs.12,000/- per month towards the said loan as installment. According to him, after paying the installments of GPF, LIC and income tax, the petitioner is left with a sum of Rs.9000/- only and the order directing payment of Rs.7000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite to the wife is bad in view of the aforesaid circumstances. Learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar has rightly observed that the amount paid towards income tax is the only valid deduction from the income, which could be considered for assessing the monthly income of the husband. According to him, what else he is contributing towards GPF, LIC, and home loan, is his own property and he cannot reduce his income in such a manner so as to make nothing available to his wife. I perfectly agree with the approach of learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar. If he desires he may reduce the contribution to GPF and he may reduce other deductions. What kind of bank loan, he has taken is not specified by him. If he has bought a house by taking a home loan from the bank, he is not keeping his wife in the same. So the said house is for him. There is no plea on his part that he had no other house to live in. So the loan is not a valid liability on account of which he could reduce his income. Civil Revision No. 6300 of 2011 --4-- In these circumstances, the income of the husband cannot be taken below Rs.30,000/- per month and learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar has been right in awarding a sum of Rs.7000/- per month towards maintenance pendente lite to the wife with a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards litigation expenses. Thus, finding no reason to interfere with the impugned order, the revision petition is dismissed. (VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE 17.10.2011 dinesh