( 1 ) IN her suit for maintenance, return of stridhan etc. against the husband-defendanat No. I and his family members, the plaintiff-wife has filed this application under sections 94 and 151 Civil Procedure Code for grant of interim maintenance and litigation expenses.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff was married to defendant No. I in accordance with Hindu rites on 20 May 1990. Plaintiff alleges that right from the very first day of her marriage, the defendants started ill treating her as she had failed to bring in the remaining bit of dowry promised at the time of marriage; despite her best efforts, the husband refused to consumate the marriage, till a car,v. C. R. , air conditioner etc. was brought by her; she was beaten up in the presence of her relatives, who tried to intervene and sort out the differences between the plaintiff and the defendants and ultimately due to continuous harassment and fear to her life, she was compelled to leave her matrimonial home on 17 August 1990, and since then she has been residing with her parents. She claims that defendant No. 1, a practising chartered accountant, has net income of Rs. 20,000. 00 p. m. from profession apart from interest and dividend income and lucrative joint family business with monthly income of approximately Rs. 40,000. 00. She further alleges that defendant No. l owns a car, a mber of telephones, flats and is having joint kitchen with other members of the family, the defendants herein, and this has not to incur any expenditure on food.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff also claims that she is unemployed; her continued habitation in the parental home even though married, is causing immense distress and depression to her family and she wants to live separately. She needs money to hire a house and make both ends meet. The plaintiff thus claims maintenance in the suit and pendente lite @ Rs. 4,500. 00 per month.

( 4 ) THE defendants in their reply filed, resist the grant of any interim maintenance relief on the ground that: (i) in the absence of a specific provision in this behalf such a relief cannot be granted in the present proceedings, in an application under sections 94 and 151 CPC, (ii) there is no family business of the defendants with which defendant No. l has a connection and, therefore, no maintenance is payable by any of the defendants and (iii) defendant No. l does not have sufficient means to pay any maintenance to the plaintiff inasmuch as his net income for the year ending 31 March 1991 was Rs. 24,690. 00. Defendant No. l has also alleged in the reply that the plaintiff is a qualified nursery teacher and is teaching in a school getting a good salary. Allegations of harassment, cruelty etc. are also denied by the defendants.

( 5 ) I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

( 6 ) THE first question falling for consideration is the objection about the propriety of grant of interim maintenance in the present proceedings, feebly raised in reply to the application but not seriously pressed during the course of arguments on the application.

( 7 ) THERE is no separate provision in the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short the act ), for grant of maintenance pendente lite. Section 18 of the Act, under which the case of the plaintiff in essence is based, only provides for maintenance to a Hindu wife, subject however to the two exceptions, carved out in sub-section (3) of section 18 of the Act, which extinguish the right of a Hindu wife to a separate residence and maintenance. Provisions of Sub-section (1) of the said section make it obligatory for the husband to maintain the wife during her life time. Her claim to maintenance is not forfeited even if she resides separately on account of any of the grounds mentioned in Sub-section (2) of the said Section. In other words, the obligation to maintain the wife would still remain on the husband even though the wife might be living separately from the husband until it is proved that the wife is residing separately