TIRATH S. THAKUR, J.

( 1 ) THIS civil revision petition is directed against an order passed by civil Judge (Senior Division) and Principal Judicial Magistrate First class, K. G. F. , on an application under Section 36 of the Indian Divorce act, 1869 seeking interim maintenance for the petitioner-wife. The application has by the said order been dismissed on the ground that the appellant-wife is in a position to maintain herself.

( 2 ) THE parties are Christians by faith. They appear to have tied the knot in the year 1984 and raised three children out of the wedlock, all of whom are females. The respondent-husband is a driller in an oil rig and appears to be in the employment of a company based in Abu Dhabi. He has in a petition under Sections 10 and 11 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, sought dissolution of marriage on the ground that the wife has committed adultery since the solemnisation of the marriage. The wife has denied the allegations and is resisting the prayer for divorce. The matter has remained pending before the Trial Court since the year 1995.

( 3 ) DURING the pendency of the above proceedings, LA. No; XIII was filed by the petitioner-wife in March 2000 seeking alimony pendente lite at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month besides litigation expenses of Rs. 25,000/ -. The application stated that the husband was employed as a driller with a monthly salary of Rs. 1 lakh. Besides, he was publishing a newspaper in the name of "k. G. F. Update" and earning a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from the same. He was, according to the application, the owner of a building worth more than Rs. 50 lakhs, besides a Toyota car valuing more than Rs. 12 lakhs. The wife alleged that she had no means or source of income to maintain herself in keeping with her status and that she deserved maintenance at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month from the husband.

( 4 ) THE application was opposed by the respondent-husband inter alia on the ground that the wife was employed as an Office Assistant in M/s. Ramba Hydrogen Private Limited, for the past 5 years and was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 2,500/ -. The Trial Court has by the order impugned in this revision petition rejected the prayer for maintenance on the ground that the wife was drawing a monthly salary of a sum of Rs. 2,500/- and that she did not require any further amount towards maintenance during the pendency of the divorce proceedings. Aggrieved, the wife has filed the present revision petition as already noticed earlier.

( 5 ) APPEARING for the petitioner, Mr. A. K. Mohanakrishnan argued that the view taken by the Trial Court was wholly unsustainable. He submitted that the mere fact that the wife was earning a paltry sum of rs. 2,500/- per month was no reason for the Court to decline the award of interim maintenance, having regard to the financial position of the respondent-husband. He submitted that the respondent-husband was admittedly drawing a monthly salary of a sum of Rs. 50,000/- besides a sum of Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 3,000/- which he was earning every month from the newspaper which he was publishing. He had according to Mr. A. K. Mohanakrishnan, no one except himself and the children to feed and could therefore without any difficulty spare a reasonable amount for the maintenance of the petitioner, who was earning no more than a sum of rs. 2,500/- as salary per month.

( 6 ) ON behalf of the respondent-husband, Mr. Aswathnarayan, argued that the petitioner-wife was living in adultery and was therefore disentitled to any relief whatsoever from this Court towards maintenance. He placed reliance upon an affidavit said to have been sworn by the petitioner -wife in which she is alleged to have admitted her relationship with respondent 2 who was during the relevant period a Parish priest in k. G. F. Alternatively, he submitted that since the petitioner was in employment drawing salary, there was no justification for grant of any maintenance to her. It was urged that although the respondent-husband w

Click Here to Read the rest of this document