( 1 ) ARGUMENTS were heard on the petition for final disposal on the request of counsel for the parties. This revision petition is directed against an order of Additional District Judge, Delhi dated 6/9/2000 by which he has fixed interium maintenance of the respondent wife at the rate of Rs. 4,000. 00 per month besides litigation expenses of Rs. 7,000. 00 in a petition under Section 24 of Hindu marriage Act.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the parties were married on 28/4/1999 and lived together till 7/7/1999 when they separated. The petitioner hushand filed a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13 (1) (i-a} of the Hindu Marriage Act against the respondent wife. The respondent wife filed an application under Section 24 of hindu Marriage Act for grant of interium maintenance rs. 5,000. 00 per month plus Rs. 2,000. 00 per month as rent of the accommodation taken by her for her residence and Rs. 22,000. 00 as litigation expenses and a further amount of Rs. 20,000. 00 which she had taken as loan from her relative for her maintenance and expenses for the period from 7/7/1999 to 31/12/1999. In the application the respondent wife alleged that the petitioner is an Engineer and was working as Project engineer with I. C. M. Engineering Private Limited, Gurgaon on a monthly salary of Rs. 12,000. 00. She herself was, a house wife and non-working and had no income of her own. After the marriage the petitioner treated her with cruelty and had turned her out of the matrimonial home. According to her, her parents had spent about Rs. 5,00,000. 00 upon the marriage. Her parents had given the Maruti Car and Rs 1,50,000. 00 in cash to the petitioner. After the marriage she was told by the petitioner that he had pre-marriage ,illlcit relations with one Miss Bhavna Sharma which will not be given up and that she would-have to bear with it.

( 3 ) OPPOSING the application the petitioner put counter blame on the respondent and stated that she had treated him with cruelty. He has denied that he had any illicit relations with Miss Bhavna Sharma. He admitted that he had a degree in Engineering but stated that he was working as Project Engineer on contract basis. He also stated that he had to maintain his old parents also. He denied that he had any income. He denied that the petitioner had borrowed any money from her relatives or that the petitioner had no income of her own to fall back upon.

( 4 ) COUNSEL fotr the petitioner has submitted that the respondent had treated petitioner with cruelty and had deserted the petitioner barely three months after the marriage She lodged a complaint with National commission for women and thereafter she filed a complaint with Crime against women Cell at Nanakpura Petitioner has been granted anticipatory ball with other members of his family after he paid Rs. 1,00,000. 00 to the respondent in the court It was further submitted that the petitioner was working as a Project engineer on contract and that he recived Rs. 32,500. 00 for the period from 3/11/1998 if to 31/10/1999 and now he was unemployed An application of the order for interim maintenance filed before the Additional District judge had been dismissed thereafter the petitioner on 26/9/2000 withdrew the divorce petition and it was dismissed as withdrawn He argued that the order of the learned additional District Judge was based on conjectures and surmises and it be set aside.

( 5 ) ON the other hand counsel for the respondent argued that the petitioner is a Graduate Engineer from Delhi college of Engineering and that he was working as a Project engineer and that it is unbelievable that he was unemployed and was not earning at all He further submitted that in the marriage ceremony one Maruti Car was given be the parents of the respondent which is now in the possession and use of the petitioner and that the petitioner could not maintain that car without any income. It is further stated that after the review application