IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 4490 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: January 12, 2011. Ravinder Kaur ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus Dalbir Singh ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. P.S.Khurana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for the respondent. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for modification of order dated 15.03.2010, Annexure P4 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar on application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short the ‘Act’) filed in proceedings under Section 13 of the Act for divorce filed by respondent-husband against petitioner-wife vide which petitioner-wife was granted maintenance pendent lite at the rate of `1500/- per month. CR No.4490 of 2010 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that she is residing in a rented house having no source of income and hence, it is very difficult for her to maintain herself with meager amount of `1500/- per month. It has been contended that respondent-husband also owns agricultural land besides pension income. It has been contended by learned counsel for the respondent- husband that petitioner left the matrimonial home without just cause leaving behind three children. It is further contended that respondent-husband solemnized the marriage of two daughters from his savings and that he is also looking after his son and that it is denied that he owns agricultural land rather it is contended that his only source of income is pension being received by him from the military. At the time of passing the impugned order the respondent was getting `4500/- per month as pension. Admitted facts are that, respondent-husband is pensioner. Parties are having grown up children. Marriages of both the daughters were solemnized by respondent-husband. Son is also residing with respondent- husband. There is no evidence that he is having agricultural land. He is surviving on the pension being received by him from military. He is getting `4500/- per month as pension. Hence, in view of aforementioned facts, it cannot be said that any illegality or material irregularity has been committed by learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar in passing the impugned order dated 2 CR No.4490 of 2010 15.03.2010 granting ad-interim maintenance @`1500/- per month to petitioner-wife or grave injustice or gross failure of justice has occasioned thereby, warranting interference by this Court. There is no merit in the present revision petition. The same is, hereby, dismissed. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) January 12, 2011. JUDGE 'om' 3