MEERA BAI Vs. ANAND KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil revision is directed against the order of Mr. S.P. Singh Chaudhary, Additional District Judge, Delhi, dated 28th July, 1930. By this order, the petitioner's application for interim maintenance and litigation expenses, under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (to be referred to in short as "the Act"), was rejected.

(2.) The main ground for rejection of the application appears to be, the fact that the petitioner did not deny by way of a rejoinder the allegation of the respondent that the petitioner was earning Rs. 200.00 per month.

(3.) Mr. S. P. Pandey, appearing for the petitioner, contends that the Additional District Judge, Delhi has exercised his jurisdiction with material irregularity and if the order is allowed to stand it would occassion a failure of justice as also cause irreparable injury to the petitioner. He submits that as the petitioner had clearly asserted in her application under section 24 of the Act, supported by an affidavit that she had no independent source of income sufficient for her maintenance and support, it was not necessary to reiterate the fact by way of a rejoinder, especially as the respondent, in his reply had not categorically asserted that the petitioner was earning Rs. 200.00 per month by way of private tuition and stitching work but averred that "the respondent is made to believe that the petitioner herself is earning about Rs. 200.00 per month by way of private tuitions and stitching work etc. and as such income is sufficient for maintaining and supporting herself".