IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.795 of 2007 JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV @ JITENDRA KR. SINGH YADAV Versus RENU DEVI ----------- 2 22.8.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner as with regard to the quantum of compensation being Rs 2000/- per month can not be said to be having a substance inasmuch as the assertion of the opposite party-wife that the petitioner has substantial means of income from his family resources has not been denied and what has been said by the petitioner that he has got no personal income. Once this fact is admitted that the family of the petitioner has substantial income as was asserted by the opposite party in paragraph 8 and not controverted in reply filed by the petitioner, this Court would not find that the amount of Rs 2000/- awarded by way of maintenance pendente lite is either excessive or illegal. In that view of the matter, this application is wholly misconceived and is hereby dismissed. shahid (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) - 2 -