1 2025:CGHC:13177 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRR No. 1278 of 2024 1 - Smt. Rajeshwari Sahu W/o Shri Manish Kumar Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Mohlai, Durg, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - Manish Kumar Sahu S/o Motiram Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Baghera, Ward No.56, Durg, Tahsil And District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma}) Order on Board 19/03/2025 Heard on admission. 2. Present revision is filed against the order dated 28.08.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg whereby the application filed by the applicant for interim maintenance has been partly allowed after appreciating the facts and income of the applicant 2 and awarded Rs. 4,000/- per month as maintenance to her which is very meager amount and is required to be enhanced. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that marriage of the applicant and respondent was performed as per Hindu rituals and customs at Durg on 26.06.2021. It is alleged that after marriage, the applicant and her in- laws used to harass the respondent for demand of dowry. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the order dated 27.09.2024 is bad in the eye of law and is perverse, arbitrary and erroneous, therefore it is liable to be set aside. He submits that the court below has not appreciated the income of the non-applicant rightly and passed the order impugned. He further submits that the learned Family Court has also failed to appreciate that the applicant is serving as Chartered Accountant in the CG Cooperative Marketing Association and earning Rs. 60,000/- to 70,000/- and his father is getting pension of Rs. 50,000/- per month and also getting income from the shops on rent. Applicant has not filed any pay slip or any document regarding the salary of the non-applicant and his family which comes to Rs. 2,00,000/- per month therefore the order is liable to be set aside. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. For deciding the application of interim maintenance, the court has to look into the claim to satisfy that there is a prima facie case for making such an order. It is clear from the order dated 17.09.2024 that the non-applicant(husband) has mentioned his salary as Rs. 22,357/- per month but as per the submission of the applicant (wife) it is mentioned as Rs. 2,00,000/- per month. 7. The trial court has granted Rs. 4,000/- as interim maiontenance to the applicant/wife. Taking into consideration the salary of the non- 3 applicant, the maintenance awarded to the applicant/wife is meagre and therefore, it is directed that the non-applicant shall pay Rs. 6,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the applicant (wife) and the trial court shall decide the main petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on cooperation by the parties, at the earliest preferably within a period of six months, from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 8. Revision stands disposed of at the admission stage. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.21 10:53:16 +0530