KRISHNA KANT Vs. DURGESHNANDANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Petitioner married with the respondent on 15.12.2001 as per the Hindu rites. Out of the wedlock, one son was born on 12.7.2002. In the proceedings, respondent, wife filed an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act claiming maintenance from the petitioner, husband. Learned trial Court, by the order impugned, has allowed the application and has fixed the interim maintenance, as mentioned hereinabove, in favour of the respondent, wife and minor son.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner submitted that u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, no maintenance can be granted to the minor son. In this connection, he has placed reliance on Short Note No. 68 reported in 1995 MPLJ Rajendra Kumar Mishra v. Sushiladevi. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length. In the considered opinion of this Court, the reliance placed on the aforesaid Short Note does not come to the rescue of the petitioner in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case reported in AIR 1997 SC 3397. It was held by the Supreme Court that section 24 of the Act cannot be read in isolation and cannot be given restricted meaning to hold that section 24 provides for maintenance of wife alone. If the wife is maintaining the child born out of the wedlock, then in accordance with the provisions of Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, the husband has to maintain not only the wife, but the child also.