An able-bodied husband cannot seek maintenance from the wife unless he demonstrates a disability that prevents him from earning. It is the duty of an able-bodied husband to maintain himself, the wife, and the child, if any.

ORDER :

The petitioner / husband is before this Court calling in question order dated 31-10-2022 rendered by the 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural allowing I.A.No.1 filed by the respondent /wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (‘the Act’ for short) seeking maintenance and litigation expenses in M.C.No.78 of 2021.

2. Brief facts that leads the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings are as follows:-

The petitioner and the respondent are husband and wife who get married on 06-02-2017. On their relationship turning sour, it appears that the respondent/wife leaves the matrimonial house and begins to reside with her parents. Later the husband institutes a petition under Section 13 (1)((i-a) and (i-b) of the Act in M.C.No.78 of 2021 seeking a decree of divorce against the wife. The wife in turn has instituted proceedings under Section 9 of the Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The issue in the case at hand is not with regard to merit of claims of the petitioner or the respondent qua their marriage.

3. Before the concerned Court the respondent/wife files an application in I.A.No.I on 10-11-2021 in M.C.No.78/2021, under Section 24 of the Act, seeking grant of interim maintenance at Rs.25,000/- per month and litigation expenses at Rs.1,00,000/- from the hands of the husband. The petitioner/husband objects to the said application contending that he has no means to survive, but does not stop at that, files another application to counter the application filed by the wife, contending that he is in need of interim maintenance from the hands of the wife, to maintain himself and his parents in I.A.No.2, seeking monthly maintenance of Rs.2,00,000/- and litigation expenses at Rs.30,000/- from the wife, till the disposal of the petition. The concerned Court in terms of its common order dated 31-10-2022 allows the application in I.A.No.1 filed by the wife and rejects the application in I.A.No.2 filed by the husband and grants maintenance of Rs.10,000/- and litigation expenses at Rs.25,000/- to the wife. While so rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, the Court imposes costs upon the husband for filing the application seeking maintenance from the hands of the wife. It is this common order that drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.

4. Heard Sri. M.K. Shivaraju, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri R.Madhu, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/ husband would contend with vehemence, that though he has challenged the order granting interim maintenance to the wife, the application filed by the husband ought to have been considered, as he has no means to maintain himself, let alone maintaining the wife. He would contend that the concerned Court has grossly erred in allowing the application filed by the wife and rejecting the application filed by the husband.

6. On other hand, the learned counsel representing the respondent/wife would refute the submissions to contend that the petitioner is working and earning close to Rs.50,000/- to Rs.60,000/- a month and also seeks to place on record photographs of the place and nature of work of the petitioner qua the employment of the petitioner, to contend that the Court has rightly rejected the application filed by the husband and allowed the application filed by the wife.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record.

8. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute and therefore require no reiteration. Though the challenge is to the award of maintenance to the wife, by the husband, vehement submissions are made with regard to the husband being unable to maintain his wife and requiring maintenance himself from the wife, I deem it appropriate to consider the same noticing the provision under which maintenance is claimed under the Act. Section 24 of t