JUDGMENT Mr. Vijender Singh Malik, J.:- Smt. Premo, the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the wife) filed an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. against Shardha Nand (hereinafter referred to as the husband) for grant of maintenance. It was claimed that they were married according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 12.05.1960. It was further claimed that out of this wedlock, three sons and daughter were born out of whom one daughter had expired. The wife claimed that her husband had neglected her and on account of the same, she was residing separately. She claimed that her husband is a resourceful person and has been earning Rs.20,000/- per month from his agricultural land, which is situated in village Sisana. The wife has, therefore, prayed for Rs.5000/- per month as maintenance. 2. On the other hand, the husband had filed a detailed reply, in which he had denied the claim of the wife. He has asserted that the application has been filed just to harass and humiliate him at the instigation of her sons Jagmender, Bijender and Jai Singh and daughter Bala. He claimed that he is 76 years of age and was not doing any work. According to him, his wife is getting Rs.500/- per month as old age pension. It is also added that father of his wife died leaving behind Smt. Premo and her two other sisters and at the time of death of her father, she inherited 1/3rd share in the estate left by him. He denied having an income of Rs.20,000/- per month. He rather claimed that he has no source of income after transferring his entire land in favour of his sons. 3. After taking evidence of the parties, learned District Judge (Family Court), Sonipat decided the application vide judgment dated 17.12.2012 and awarded a sum of Rs.2000/- per month to the wife. 4. Against the aforesaid judgment, Premo, the wife has filed Crl. Revision No. 572 of 2013 for enhancement of maintenance and Shardha Nand, the husband has filed Crl. Revision No.(F) 4 of 2013 for setting aside the judgment awarding maintenance. 5. Learned counsel for the wife Mr. Ajai Jain has submitted that the husband had 67 kanals of land, out of which he has sold some land to his sons for Rs.85,92,500/- . Revision No.(F) 4 of 2013 for setting aside the judgment awarding maintenance. 5. Learned counsel for the wife Mr. Ajai Jain has submitted that the husband had 67 kanals of land, out of which he has sold some land to his sons for Rs.85,92,500/- . According to him, this amount is so heavy that even if it is earning interest, the interest would be more than Rs.20,000/- per month. He has further submitted that he still has 5 kanal 19 marlas agricultural land with him and though the wife is getting Rs.500/- per month as old age pension, a sum of Rs.2000/- per month is still not sufficient for maintenance of the wife. According to him, some land was left by the father of the wife but the same is being cultivated by her cousins and is not under the cultivation of the wife. 6. Mr. Vikram Punia, learned counsel for Shardha Nand, the husband, has submitted, on the other hand, that the land was not sold but was transferred to the sons, who are dependent on agricultural work. According to him, he is only having land measuring 5 kanals 19 marlas and whatever income he has, he gets from the same. He has further submitted that he is a person of the age of 76 years and is unable to earn anything. 7. The amount of Rs.85,92,500/- is shown to be the sale price of the land of the husband. Though the land is sold to the sons, the very fact that the price is shown to have been received would mean that the husband has received the sale price of the land. If this amount is deposited in some bank in fixed deposit, it will give more than Rs.50,000/- per month as interest taking it on a very lower side. 8. It has not come on the record as to what was the holding of Chandgi , the father of the wife. So it cannot be said as how much land came to the share of the wife. The said land is said to be in cultivation of the cousin brother of the wife. It is usual in villages that land of sonless proprietor is cultivated by nephews etc. and the daughters get nothing. So it cannot be said at this stage that wife is getting any income from that land. 9. The said land is said to be in cultivation of the cousin brother of the wife. It is usual in villages that land of sonless proprietor is cultivated by nephews etc. and the daughters get nothing. So it cannot be said at this stage that wife is getting any income from that land. 9. The husband has many sons with him. He had a moral obligation to give the land to his sons for cultivation who are said to be dependent on agriculture. This would show that he may not have taken price for the land from his sons. However, the income from the land would still be the income of the husband. 10. Taking into account the aforesaid circumstances, I find that the husband has many sons and he has given his land to those sons. However, he is still liable to pay maintenance to his wife. A sum of Rs.2000/- per month has been awarded by learned District Judge, (Family Court), Sonipat. I think that this amount taken with the old age pension may not be sufficient for the wife to make both ends meet. I find that notional increase in the amount awarded by learned District Judge (Family Court), Sonipat is justified. Therefore, while accepting the petition of the wife, I increase the maintenance allowance from Rs.2000/- per month to Rs.2500/- per month and I dismiss the petition filed by the husband. --------0.B.S.0------------ —————————