IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.27 of 2009 Santosh Kumar Yadav, son of Upendra Yadav, resident of village-Kharka Basant, P.S.-Jalley, District- Darbhanga. …………….Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Sangita Devi, wife of Santosh Kumar Yadav resident of village-Kharka Basant, P.S.-Jalley, District- Darbhanga. ……….Opposite Parties ----------- 4. 21.10.2011 The husband-petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 16.10.2008 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Samastipur in Maintenance Case No.19/2008 by which he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.3000/-per month by way of maintenance and Rs.5000/- for meeting the cost of litigation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has no means to pay a sum of Rs.3000/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2 and the amount of maintenance should be reduced. The learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that at the time of the maintenance case, the petitioner was a Supervisor and now he has been promoted 2 and his salary has been increased. She is suffering from several ailments and she requires more money to meet the expenses of medicines. After hearing the learned counsel for the both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Principal Judge has considered the evidence and other materials on the record. It further appears that the petitioner has left the Pairvi and has not produced any evidence to controvert the contention/evidence of the opposite party no.2. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)