Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that order dated 23.5.2022 is illegal and without jurisdiction as at the time of passing the same, court below failed to consider the facts of the case. He next submitted that opposite party no. 2, the wife of the revisionist is without any reasonable cause residing separately and revisionist still wants to live with her and she is not ready to live with the revisionist but in spite of that, she earlier moved an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and during pendency of the same, she moved an application for interim maintenance which is allowed by the court below. He also submitted that opposite party no. 2 is a practising Advocate and she is having a very decent earning, therefore, application moved by the revisionist for her interim maintenance was liable to be dismissed but court below instead of dismissing the same allowed it and directed the revisionist to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month. He next submitted that at the time of granting interim maintenance court below directed the revisionist to pay amount of Rs. 10,000/- as interim maintenance from the date of application of interim maintenance, therefore, till date, a huge arrear has been accumulated and it causes great hardship to the revisionist and therefore, impugned order dated 23.5.2022 is liable to set aside.
