It is contended that while passing the impugned order, trial Court has failed to visualize the actual income of the opposite party/husband and, therefore, the awarded sum towards alimony pendente lite as well as the cost of litigation are exceptionally low. It is further argued on behalf of the petitioner/wife that by no stretch of imagination a person can be expected to lead a decent life with a paultry sum of Rs. 3,000/per month. It is further argued that considering the increasing cost of litigation, the litigation cost as assessed by the learned trial Court is equally inadequate and the same is required to be increased. While opposing the prayer as made in the instant revisional application, Mr. Ray, learned advocate for the opposite party/husband at the very outset submits before this Court that learned trial Court is very much justified in passing the impugned order inasmuch as the learned trial Court has rightly noticed that a sum of Rs. 1 lakh is lying with the petitioner/wife as has been given by the opposite party/husband to the petitioner/wife in course of a village settlement.
