JUDGMENT Mr. L.N. Mittal, J.: (Oral) - Husband Beant Singh has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 09.01.2010, passed by learned Additional District Judge (Adhoc), Patiala, thereby directing the petitioner-husband to pay Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite to respondent-wife Baljinder Kaur w.e.f. 25.09.2009 – the date of filing of application by the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short – the Act). 2. Petitioner-husband filed divorce petition under Section 13 of the Act against respondent-wife. The respondent moved application under Section 24 of the Act claiming maintenance pendente lite alleging that petitioner has 13 acres land and is also running business and PCO of STD. The petitioner-husband alleged that he has only 3 acres land and is spending on the education of both the children residing with him. He has also engaged maid/Governess to look after the children. 3. Learned trial court, vide impugned order (Annexure P-4), directed the petitioner-husband to pay Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite to respondent-wife with effect from the date of application. Feeling aggrieved, husband has filed this revision petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. 5. Divorce petition filed by husband stands allowed by the trial court, vide judgment and decree dated 30.04.2011. The dispute in this revision petition, therefore, is for the period of 19 months only i.e. since 25.09.2009 till 30.04.2011. While issuing notice of motion, interim stay was granted regarding 50% of the amount of maintenance pendente lite awarded by the trial court. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner paid the balance 50% maintenance allowance i.e. Rs.2,500/- per month to the respondent-wife during pendency of the divorce petition. Counsel for the parties also stated that respondent has preferred F. A. O. No. 158-M of 2011 against judgment and decree of the trial court and during pendency of the said FAO, Division Bench of this Court has granted maintenance pendente lite to the wife @ Rs.3,500/- per month. 6. Counsel for the petitioner contended that keeping in view income of the petitioner and his liability to maintain both the children, maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.2,500/- per month, as already paid by the petitioner-husband during pendency of divorce petition, is just and reasonable. 7. 6. Counsel for the petitioner contended that keeping in view income of the petitioner and his liability to maintain both the children, maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.2,500/- per month, as already paid by the petitioner-husband during pendency of divorce petition, is just and reasonable. 7. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent-wife contended that Division Bench of this Court has granted maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.3,500/- per month in the aforesaid FAO and the same amount should be awarded in the present case for the period of pendency of the divorce petition. 8. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. 9. Keeping in view all the circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that ends of justice would be met if the husband is directed to pay maintenance pendente lite @ Rs.3,500/- per month to the respondent-wife for the period in question since 25.09.2009 – the date of filing of application under Section 24 of the Act till 30.04.2011 – the date of decision of the divorce petition. It is ordered accordingly, in modification of impugned order of the trial court. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. ---------0.B.S.0------------