SIVANKUTTY Vs. S KOMALAKUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of some practical importance in Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 arises for consideration in this Civil Revision Petition. Certainly, this question is not res integra, but judicial opinion is not uniform.

(2.) The revision petitioner is the husband. His wife and child filed a suit under S.18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 19S6, for short the Act. In the suit, the plaintiffs moved for interim relief of maintenance. The Trial Court allowed interim maintenance. It awarded Rs. 300/- per month for mother and child. The revision petitioner challenges this order.

(3.) The counsel for the revision petitioner submitted before me two points. He raised a question of law. He said that the court when trying a suit under S.18 of the Act has no jurisdiction to pass an order for interim maintenance. This he said on the ground that there is no specific provision for it provided in the Act. He also submitted before me that some of the courts in India have taken the view that no interim maintenance can be allowed in a suit under the Act. Of course, in fairness, he submitted before me that judicial opinion is not uniform. He told me that the quantum of maintenance determined by the court is not commensurate with the income of the petitioner.