A wife is entitled to interim maintenance pending appeal against a decree of nullity of marriage.

( 1 ) THE question raised here was whether the reputed wife, who had already obtained a decree in her favour in the Trial Court declaring her marriage as a nullity, on the ground of her husband's physical impotency, could maintain an application in the Appellate Court against the husband appellant for interim maintenance, pending the hearing of the appeal.

( 2 ) THE facts shortly are:--The marriage between the parties was solemnised according to Hindu rites on January 26, 1961. The wife was then 19 years of age, a student in the 3rd year B. A. Class of Victoria College, Calcutta, now she is a graduate of the University of Calcutta The husband then aged 27 was a D. Phil of the said University a lecturer of Botany in the Bangabasi College, Calcutta at present he is a research assistant in the department of Anatomy. Mac Gill University, Montreal, Canada, drawing annually 7000 Canadian dollars, equivalent to more than Rs. 48,000 after current devaluation.

( 3 ) THE wife petitioner alleged, and it was so found by the Trial Court, that the husband had been physically impotent from before the marriage and that it had continued till the date of the application. The marriage could not be consummated since its inception.

( 4 ) ON July 31, 1965, the wife filed the application in the Court of the District Judge of 24 Parganas, under the provision of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) fo, annulment of her marriage. Her application under Section 24 of the Act for alimony pendente lite followed soon. The husband who is still at Canada, did contest, neither the suit nor the application under Section 24 of the Act On May 28. 1966, the wife obtained the decree annulling her marriage. A sum of Rs. 500 per month was granted in her favour as alimony pendente lite and a further sum of Rs. 500 towards the cost of litigation. On August 8, 1966 the connected first appeal had been filed by the husband.

( 5 ) MEANTIME on June 11, 1966 the wife filed an application before the Trial Court for grant of a permanent alimony under the provision of Section 25 of the Act claiming one thousand rupees per month or a gross sum of Rs. 50,000 The said application is pending decision.

( 6 ) AN application was moved on behalf of the husband in the connected appeal, giving rise to the above Civil Rule on September 9, 1966 calling upon the wife to show cause why the operation of the judgment and decree appealed against, and further proceedings in the suit regarding permanent alimony should not be stayed pending the hearing of the appeal. The wife respondent opposed the Rule by filing an affidavit-in-opposition. She filed the instant independent application on June, 12, 1967 in the connected appeal for the grant of a sum of Rs. 750 as monthly maintenance and a certain sum for meeting the expenses of the proceeding. It was streneously opposed by the learned Advocate Mr. S. C. Das Gupta, appearing for the husband who challenged the maintainability, of such an application, after denying the allegation of impotency. It was inter alia stated on behalf of the husband, by an affidavit sworn to by the husband's father, possibly thinking it to be relevant on the question of quantum of maintenance, that the wife's father "has no academic, cultural, professional or financial distinction he is but a person of ordinary means and position in life, owner of no house of his own, no owner of any motor car, not any traveller by air" It was further sworn to by the husband's father, to my mind crudely, that the husband felt extremely exhasperated by the wife's exceptionally unusual sex-appetite Her extravagant sex desire provoked suspicion about the wife's virginity and she became intolerable which compelled the husband to avoid her. According to him, a sum of Rs. 75 per month would be more than enough for the maintenance of the wife. The wife reiterated the statement made in her application and replied back, inter alia stating, to