EKNATH S O SUKHDEO GAIKWAD Vs. NIRMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision can be disposed of at the admission stage itself. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, rule is, therefore, made returnable forthwith.

(2.) A short but important question is involved in this civil revision application. The petitioner is the husband of the respondent wife, whose marriage took place in accordance with Bhil rites on 28-4-1986. The petitioner filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. A-46/1995 in the Family Court at Aurangabad for dissolution of the marriage. Pending that petition the respondent made her application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act) and the Family Court by its order made on 20-9-1995 directed the petitioner to pay interim alimony at the rate of Rs. 700/- per month to the respondent and her minor children, in addition to Rs. 500/- towards costs of the expenses of the litigation and Rs. 160/- towards the expenses to be borne by the respondent for attending the Court.

(3.) MR. Naik, learned Counsel for the petitioner, urged that granting interim alimony not only to the respondent but also to her two minor children under section 24 of the Act is illegal. It is submitted that section 24 of the Act does not empower the Court to grant interim alimony to the children of either of the spouses. Therefore, in the instant case, the Family Court has committed an error of law in granting interim alimony in excess than what the respondent wife was entitled to receive having regard to the financial capacity of the petitioner.