(1.) THE wife is the revision petitioner and the revision is directed against the order passed by the Family Court. Coimbatore, in I.A.No.436 of 2002, which is filed for claiming interim maintenance from the respondent/husband at the rate of Rs 10,000 per month, Rs 2,500 towards house rent per month and also a sum of Rs 15.000 towards legal expenses.
(2.) THE petition for interim maintenance was opposed by the respondent and in his counter, he has stated that the petitioner is in a position to maintain herself and she is getting income from the ancestral properties in which she has got 1/3rd share. It is further stated in the counter that one of the ancestral properties situated in G.S.Nos.174/1 and 174/2 in Ganapathy P.N.Palayam measuring about 90 cents of land and building, from which a sum of Rs30,000 is getting by way of monthly rent, in which the share of the petitioner is Rs. 10,000 per month. THE petitioner has also got l/3rd share in the properties situated at door Nos.295 to 305 in Sarojini Street, Sidhapudur. It is further stated the petitioner has got l/3rd share in the house properties situated at door Nos.123 to 126 in N.G.R Street, P.N.Palayam, in which one of the houses is occupied by her family and the other houses are rented out. An agreement of sale was entered for Rs.32 lakhs in respect of the houses at Siddhapudur and 30 cents in Ganapathy P.N.Palayam has been sold, in which the share of the petitioner would come to several lakhs of rupees.
(3.) THE decisions relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case, whereas the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case. Considering the fact that the petitioner has got sufficient means to maintain herself, the trial Court rightly dismissed the petition filed for interim maintenance as stated above. Hence there is no reason to interfere with findings of the trial Court and the same is confirmed.