SYED SHAHNAWAZ Vs. BIBI NASRIN BANO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) IN the opinion of this Court the impugned order being interim in nature, directing payment of Rs. 700/ - per month by way of interim maintenance to the wife of opposite party in a proceeding under Clause 281 of the Mahomedan Law cannot be said to be either illegal or without jurisdiction. All that Article 281 says is as follows :

(3.) IT would, therefore, be clear that at least Clause 281 of the Mahomedan Law does not prohibit a court while adjudicating a suit for restitution of conjugal rights. The strong reliance placed by the counsel for the petitioner on the provisions of Articles 277, 278, 279 and 280 under the heading maintenance of wives also will be of no avail because what has been postulated therein is certain contingencies in which the maintenance to a wife can be refused. That will not mean that when a proceeding comes under Clause 281, the Court will be denued of its power of granting maintenance even if it is satisfied that the wife is not in a position to maintain herself and contest the proceeding so brought against her by the husband.