A. Rama Krishnan vs R. Essakkiammal @ Lakshmi

D. Hariparanthaman, J.—The petitioner herein filed H.M.O.P. No. 201 of 2008 before the Sub Court, Tuticorin, seeking resolution of

marriage with the respondent. The marriage is not disputed. The respondent herein filed I.A. No. 520 of 2011 for interim maintenance of Rs.

5,000/- per month. The application was filed u/s 24 of Hindu Marriage Act and Section 151 of C.P.C.

The respondent wife pleaded that she has no means and she does not possess any property. Her father also died and she is living with her

mother. According to the wife, the petitioner herein is doing milk business and he is earning Rs. 20,000/- per month.

The same was contested by the petitioner husband. According to the petitioner, he was maintaining his mother and also he incurred heavy debt,

when he conducted marriage for his sisters and brother. The petitioner husband also stated that the wife is having lot of lands and she gets Rs.

3,00,000/- as annual income and she is also a tailor and earns Rs. 5,000/- per month. Hence, the revision petitioner sought for the dismissal of I.A.

No. 520 of 2011 in H.M.O.P. No. 201 of 2008 filed for interim maintenance.

After hearing both sides, the Trial Court, in its order dated 3.7.2012 in I.A. No. 520 of 2011 in H.M.O.P. No. 201 of 2008, has held that the

petitioner wife is entitled to monthly maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- as an interim measure, from the date of filing of application viz., 9.11.2011.

This revision is against the order dated 3.7.2012 in I.A. No. 520 of 2011 in H.M.O.P. No. 201 of 2008.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued vehemently that the petitioner is a coolie and he has no means to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per

month. The petitioner is looking after his aged mother and he also celebrated marriages for his sisters and brother and thereby incurred a heavy

debt and therefore, he could not be mulcted with the interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000/-.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Though now it is stated that the petitioner is a coolie, no such averment is made in the counter affidavit in I.A. No. 520 of 2011 in H.M.O.P.

No. 201 of 2008, claiming interim maintenance.

The revision petitioner has admitted that he is maintaining his aged mother. It is not his case that he is not maintaining his mother due to poverty

and his mother is maintained by his sisters and brother. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that he only conducted marriages for his sisters and

brother and incurred heavy debt.

In view of these aforesaid factors, I am of the view that there is no infirmity in the order of the Trial Court, directing the petitioner to pay a sum

of Rs. 3,000/- as interim maintenance. Accordingly, the revision petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.