JUDGMENT :

Jasgurpreet Singh Puri, J. (Oral)

The present revision petition has been filed for setting aside the impugned order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul, vide which interim maintenance has been granted to the tune of Rs.8,000/- per month to respondent No.2-wife and to the tune of Rs.7,000/- per month to respondent No.l-minor son, who is of the age of 5 years.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it is a case where earlier an order was passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul dated 17.08.2023 whereby interim maintenance of the same amount as aforesaid was granted to the respondents but the same was assailed by filing a revision petition before this Court, which was set aside on the ground that affidavits declaring the assets and liabilities of the parties in terms of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh versus Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 were not filed and therefore, the aforesaid order was set aside with a direction to pass a fresh order after getting the affidavits in terms of judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh's case (Supra). He further submitted that now a fresh order has been passed dated 21.12.2024, vide which same amount has been fixed as interim maintenance for the respondents i.e. Rs.8,000/- per month for respondent No.2-wife and Rs.7,000/- per month for respondent No.l-minor son, who is of the age of 5 years.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that so far as the factum of marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2 is concerned, the same is not in dispute and it is also not in dispute that respondent No.l-minor son was born out of the said wedlock, who is of the age of 5 years and is in the care and custody of respondent No.2-wife. He further submitted that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul has assessed the income of the petitioner-husband as Rs.35,000/- to Rs.40,000/- per month for the purpose of considering the application for the grant of interim maintenance, although the petitioner was having no source of income even as per his affidavit, which was filed pertaining to declaration of his assets and liabilities. He further submitted that so far as respondent No.2-wife is concerned, she has filed a false affidavit as she was actually earning but is shown not to be earning any amount in the aforesaid affidavit and the same ought to have been considered by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul before adjudicating the interim maintenance or even the quantum of interim maintenance. He also submitted that once the petitioner has no source of income then he was not bound to provide any interim maintenance to the respondents and therefore, the aforesaid impugned order vide which interim maintenance has been granted to the respondents is liable to be set aside.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The present revision petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul, vide which interim maintenance has been granted to respondent No.2-wife to the tune of Rs.8,000/- per month and to the tune of Rs.7,000/- per month to respondent No.l-minor son, who is of the age of 5 years, totalling Rs.15,000/- per month. In terms of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh's case (Supra), both the parties filed their respective affidavits and thereafter, the aforesaid impugned order was passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Narnaul, vide which interim maintenance as aforesaid has been granted to the respondents. A perusal of the impugned order would show that so far as the factum of marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2 is concerned, the same is not in dispute and it is also not in dispute that respondent No.l-minor son was born out of the said wedlock, who is of the age of 5 years and is in the care and custody of respondent No.2-wife. The