IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No. 938 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: January 10, 2011 Sandeep .. Petitioner Vs. Geeta .. Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. N.S. Panwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Atul Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Inder Singh Sehrawt, Advocate for the respondent. A.N. Jindal, J (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order dated 11.1.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sonepat. There is no specific denial to the fact that besides the salary of Rs.10,000/- per month, as being drawn by the petitioner, there is lot of property i.e. two houses and one plot measuring 300 square yards in village Dabarpur, one residential house and one shop at Ashok Vihar Colony, Sonepat and one plot measuring 300 square yards situated in Shastri Colony in the name of the father of the petitioner. Nothing has been placed on the record that the petitioner or his father are drawing any income from this property. It has also come on record that the respondent- wife is also working as Staff Nurse on contract basis in Primary Health Centre, Jagsi and is drawing salary of Rs.9400/- per month. Similarly, it is also not disputed that the petitioner is also on contractual employment. There is also no denying a fact that the maintenance is awarded keeping in view the status of the parties and she was to be provided maintenance for maintaining the status as equal to that of the husband. Taking stock of the situation, as put forward by the parties before me, I am inclined to hold that the amount of maintenance awarded to the respondent is on the higher side particularly when the respondent is drawing salary of Rs.9400/- though under contractual employment. However, taking stock of the property in the name of the father of the Civil Revision No. 938 of 2010 -2- petitioner, in which he has also vested right, it would be appropriate to reduce the maintenance to one half so long as she is in employment. In the circumstances this petition is partly accepted, the maintenance awarded to the respondent by the trial court is reduced to Rs.1500/- per month during the period she remain in employment. However, if she looses employment, then she would be able to apply for enhancement of the maintenance. The petitioner is directed to pay arrears of maintenance within one month at this rate. January 10, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge