Kuldip Kaur @ Charanjit Kaur vs Karam Singh

Swatanter Kumar, J.—Kuldip Kaur filed a petition u/s 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights against her husband Karam Singh. During the pendency of this petition she also filed an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act claiming maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. It was stated in the application that the husband was a teacher in a Government school and getting salary of more than Rs.9,000/- per month. He also owns agricultural land of 8 to 9 acres from where he has an additional income too. This application was contested by the husband. The husband denied all allegations except that he was a teacher having a meagre income. It was stated that the wife had done M.A. in Economics and was working as a teacher in a school and getting salary and earning money from tuition work to the tune of Rs.5,000/- per month. The minor child was stated to be with the husband, who claimed that he had to maintain his old parents out of his salary.

Learned trial Court, after discussing the merits of the case, vide its order dated 29.10.1997 granted Rs.500/- per month as maintenance pendente lite and Rs.800/- as litigation expenses.

Aggrieved from order dated 29.10.1997, the wife has filed the present revision praying for enhancement of maintainance pendente lite as well as litigation expenses. It is not denied by the wife even in the revision that the husband is maintaining the minor child. She has also not disputed the fact that she is M.A. in Economics. In these circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the wife is not having any income whatsoever. Presumption of reasonable conduct and capacity to earn reasonably are equally applicable to either of the spouses to the marriage. There is an obligation on the part of the husband to maintain his wife but he certainly cannot ignore his other obligations and such maintenance cannot be at the cost of every other moral and legal duty which the husband may owe towards his minor child and his parents.

During the course of arguments, learned counsels appearing for the respondent contended that without touching upon the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondent, the respondent would be willing to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite.

For the reasons aforestated and in view of the voluntary statement of the counsel appearing for the respondent, I would accept the offer made and would permit the respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite to the wife from the date of filing of this revision i.e. 1.6.1998. This order is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties before the learned trial court or even pleas raised before this court.

With the above observations, revision is disposed of.