JADUMANI PADHAN Vs. KUMUDINI PADHANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Bargarh, dt. 23-11-1981 wherein the petitioner has been directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.300/- per month to the wife opposite party.

(2.) The wife filed Title Suit No.80 of 1979 for separate residence and maintenance and during the pendency of the suit filed an application for interim maintenance. The husband, the present petitioner, filed objection to the said petition challenging the maintainability of the same and further challenging the quantum claimed by the wife. The Subordinate Judge after examining the materials on record has directed by the impugned order that the petitioner-husband would pay Rs.300/- per month.

(3.) Mr. P. K. Misra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that a Hindu wife is entitled to live separately from her husband and get maintenance only when the conditions prescribed in sub-sec.(2) of S.18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act are satisfied and until the wife proves a prima facie case in her favour, she is not entitled to any interim maintenance. In this particular case, the husband (defendant) having challenged his liability to pay maintenance and the wife's entitlement to have separate residence, the Subordinate Judge had no jurisdiction to grant interim maintenance at this stage. In support of his aforesaid contention, the learned counsel placed reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of K. Venkataratnam v. Kakinda Kamala, AIR 1960 Orissa, 157. In the aforesaid decision, a learned single Judge of this Court held that before the suit is heard on merits and in the absence of any prima facie case in her favour, the wife would not be entitled to any interim maintenance particularly when the husband had challenged the allegations in the plaint.