L.N. Mittal, J.@mdashSurender Kumar @ Sanjay has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order
dated 6.2.2012, Annexure P/5 passed by learned District Judge (Family Court), Bhiwani thereby granting interim maintenance to respondent wife
Kiran Rani at the rate of Rs 6000/- per month from the date of filing of application, besides litigation expenses of Rs 5500/- , on application,
Annexure P/1 moved by respondent -wife u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, the Act). The petitioner - husband has filed divorce
petition against respondent wife Kiran Rani u/s 13 of the Act. During pendency of the divorce petition, the wife moved application Annexure P/1
u/s 24 of the Act claiming interim maintenance and litigation expenses alleging that she has no source of income whereas the petitioner - husband is
Engineer earning salary of Rs 1,10,000/- per month.
2. Petitioner - husband alleged that the respondent - wife was herself serving in Delhi Public School, Bhiwani as teacher and if she has voluntarily
resigned, she is not entitled to claim interim maintenance from the petitioner. The husband denied his salary to be Rs 1,10,000/- per month.
3. Learned District Judge (Family Court), Bhiwani vide impugned order Annexure P/5 granted maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses to
the wife as noticed hereinbefore. Feeling aggrieved, husband has filed this revision petition to challenge the said order.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the case file.
5. Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the respondent - wife as per her own version in the written statement resigned from her job
as teacher in Delhi Public School and it shows that she has earning capacity. However, presently wife is not earning anything. The petitioner -
husband in his reply Annexure P/2 did not even state as to how much salary he was earning. This led to unnecessary litigation because initially
order Annexure P/3 was passed by the Family Court which was challenged by the wife for enhancement of maintenance pendente lite and this
Court vide order Annexure P/4 remitted the case to the Family Court for passing fresh order and thereupon fresh order Annexure P/5 has been
passed by Family Court. It has now transpired that the petitioner himself stated in the witness box that his gross salary is Rs 23,959/- per month
i.e. roughly Rs 24,000/- per month. However, he did not state this fact in his reply Annexure P/2.
6. Counsel for the petitioner also contended that the petitioner is also maintaining the daughter born out of the marriage. However, no such plea
was taken in reply Annexure P/2 nor during arguments before the Family Court. Be that as it may, the fact remains that there is no material on
record to depict that respondent - wife is earning anything at present whereas respondent as per his own version is having salary of Rs 23,959/-
per month. In view thereof, interim maintenance at the rate of Rs 6000/- per month only cannot be said to be excessive so as to warrant reduction
in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The impugned order of the Family Court does not suffer
from any perversity, illegality or jurisdictional error warranting interference at the hands of the husband - petitioner. The revision petition is meritless
and is accordingly dismissed in limine.
