IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1163 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.16742 of 2006)

Sanjeev Gupta     ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Shalini Gupta     ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Leave granted.

During  the  pendency  of  H.M.A.  Case  No.158  of  2003  instituted  by  the

appellant under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [for short, `the Act'], the

respondent filed an application under Section 24 of the Act for interim maintenance.

By  an  order  dated  22nd May,  2004,  District  Judge,  Yamuna  Nagar,  directed  the

appellant herein to pay interim maintenance to the respondent at the rate of Rs.750/-

per month, apart from Rs.1,100/- as litigation expenses.  The respondent challenged

that order by filing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.  By the

impugned order, the High Court directed the appellant to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to

the respondent as interim maintenance.  The High Court also enhanced the litigation

expenses from Rs.1,100/- to Rs.10,000/-.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

A  reading  of  the  order  under  challenge  shows  that  even  though  the

respondent did not produce any evidence about the income of the appellant, the High

Court  enhanced  the  interim  maintenance  by  assuming  the  appellant's  income  is

Rs.15,000/- per  month.  Learned  counsel appearing on behalf

....2/-

- 2 -  

of  the  respondent  could  not  show that  there  was  any  material  for  enhancing  the

maintenance.  Therefore, we hold that the High Court was not justified in enhancing

the amount of maintenance.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by the

High Court is set aside.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, February 23, 2009.