PADMA Vs. JOSEPH PACKIANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Against the dismissal of the petition claiming interim maintenance, the wife has filed this revision.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner and respondent are husband and wife and the respondent/husband filed divorce petition. Pending divorce petition, the petitioner/wife filed a petition seeking interim maintenance and litigation expenses. The Court below dismissed the said petition, against which, the petitioner has filed this revision petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Court below has mechanically dismissed the maintenance petition holding that the petitioner herself has filed a counter and expressed her concurrence with regard to the decree of divorce and therefore the maintenance petition cannot be allowed. As per Sec. 36 of Indian Divorce Act, until the decree of divorce, the wife is entitled for alimony from the husband and there is no legal impediment and under the said Sec. , on being satisfied of the truth of the statements contained in the maintenance petition, the Court may make such order on the husband for payment to the wife of alimony pending the suit as it may deem just. It is further contended that though the petitioner has stated in the maintenance petition that the respondent is earning Rs.6,500.00 per month as driver in a mineral company and also Rs.8,000.00 from his agricultural land totalling Rs.11,500.00 and she does not possess any employment and income for looking after her day-to-day expenses, the Court below without considering the same, has erroneously dismissed the maintenance petition on the sole reason that the petitioner is also seeking an order of divorce. Thus, the learned counsel prays for allowing this revision petition.