BRIJ LAL Vs. SMT. MAYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a husband's appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against an order dated November 1, 1972 of the learned District Judge under Section 24 of the Act directing payment of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses.

(2.) THE wife filed a petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the husband. During its pendency she applied for an order under Section 24 of the Act praying that Rs. 100/ - per mensem be awarded as maintenance pendent lite and Rs. 200/ - towards litigation expenses. The application was resisted by the husband, who alleged that the wife had left him and was living with her parents and had developed illicit relationship with one Munshi Ram, and that he, the husband, had no property of his own and was not in a position to provide maintenance for the wife. The learned District Judge, by his order dated November 1972, has ordered the husband to pay Rs. 100/ - per mensem maintenance pendent lite arid Rs. 150/ - towards litigation expenses.

(3.) IT is next urged on behalf of the husband that the learned District Judge has not applied his mind to the financial circumstances of the husband and has given a finding which is not supported by evidence. This contention is also without force. The wife and her witness Jai Dev have both testified to the fact that the husband is the proprietor of 40 bighas of land transferred to him by his grandfather. The husband admits that land was transferred in his favour, but he has not disclosed the area of the land. There is no other reliable oral evidence in regard to the property owned by the husband. In the circumstances, it must be taken that the assertion that the land consists of about 40 bighas is correct. It is not disputed that the land is agricultural in nature. Plainly, the amount awarded by the learned District Judge in favour of the wife as maintenance pendent lite and litigation expenses cannot be said to be excessive.