JUDGMENT - R.M. LODHA, J.:---Rule. Returnable forthwith.

2.Mr. Sawant, learned Counsel waives service for respondent.

3.By consent, heard finally at this stage.

4.The respondent and the petitioner are husband and wife and for the sake of convenience I shall refer them as husband and wife respectively. The parties got married on 19-5-95 and out of the wedlock, the girl child was born. The matrimonial dispute arose between the husband and wife immediately after the marriage.

5.It is the case of the wife that her ornaments and jewellery were taken by the husband and his parents when she came from her parents place. The husband and his parents also got annoyed when she delivered girl child. The wife claims to have suffered cruelty at the hands of the husband and his parents. The husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage under section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In the said petition, the wife made an application for maintenance under section 24. In the application, it was stated by her that she has no financial means to maintain herself and their child and therefore, needed interim maintenance from the husband. The husband is finance and marketing executive in some private company and is earning more than Rs. 15,000/- per month. In the application for maintenance wife claimed interim maintenance at the rate of 2000/- for herself and Rs. 2000/- for the minor daughter in addition to the cost of Rs. 5000/- for contesting the matrimonial petition. The application for interim maintenance was contested by the husband. It is the case of the husband that after the petition for dissolution of marriage was filed by him, the wife has been making false allegations and complaints against him, his brother and parents. According to him, presently, he is working with M/s. Total Solution having monthly salary of Rs. 2000/- only. The husband also set up the case that in view of the conduct of the wife, she is not entitled to any maintenance.

6.The Family Court after hearing the parties, by the impugned order dated 29-8-98 has awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per month for the maintenance of minor daughter but did not award any maintenance for wife. The reason given by the Family Court in rejecting the wife's prayer for interim maintenance is that the wife has refused to join matrimonial home unless the Mira Road flat was transferred by the husband in her name. According to the Family Court, the conduct of the parties could not be lost sight of while considering the application under section 24 and since the wife has refused to join matrimonial home, she is not entitled to any interim maintenance.

7.The reason given by the Family Court in rejecting the prayer made by the wife for interim maintenance is fully fallacious and cannot be sustained. While considering the application for maintenance pendente lite, the only consideration before the Court is inability of the spouse to maintain herself or himself for want of financial means or inadequacy of financial means to maintain at the level of social status of the other spouse from whom interim maintenance is sought and not the misconduct of the applicant spouse because in the matrimonial dispute between spouses, there would always be allegation of matrimonial offence or misconduct. If misconduct of the spouse seeking maintenance pendente lite could be relevant factor, in no proceeding of divorce or dissolution of marriage or judicial separation, the opponent spouse unable to maintain could seek interim maintenance since there could always be allegation of matrimonial misconduct against him or her in such proceeding. This was never and is not legislative intention of section 24. While enacting section 24, the legislature has provided the interim measure to the spouse having no means or inadequate means to seek maintenance from the spouse who has means to pay the same since because of matrimonial dispute till its resolution by the Court, such affected part

Click Here to Read the rest of this document