Jaswant Singh.J.@mdashPresent revision petition has been filed by the Petitioner-husband against the order dated 21.10.2010 passed by learned District Judge (Family Court), Bhiwani, where by ad interim maintenance @ Rs. 3000/-per month has been granted to Respondent No. 1-wife and Rs. 1000/-each to minor children-Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that Respondent No. 1 is an educated lady working as an agent in Multi Marketing Company and earning Rs. 70,000/-per month, whereas the Petitioner husband is working as a Hawaldar in CRPF and getting salary to the tune of about Rs. 10,000/-p.m. It is thus, contended that the ad interim maintenance granted is on higher side and liable to be set aside.
3 .After hearing the learned Counsel, I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. In order to support the contention regarding the income of Petitioner husband and Respondent wife, it appears that no material was placed before the Family Court. Even at the time of hearing today nothing has been placed on the file to show either the income of the Respondent-wife or Petitioner-husband. Keeping in view the fact that Respondent No. 1 wife is to maintain herself besides two minor children i.e. daughter aged 12 years and son aged 5 years, in my opinion, the ad interim maintenance cannot be said to be on higher side.
4. Dismissed
