Mahinder Narain, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Revision petition filed by the husband against the order dated 23/2/1985 passed by the court of the Additional District Judge in a petition under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

( 2 ) SECTION 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act reads as under :-

"where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as having regard to the petitioner s own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable. "

( 3 ) WHAT is material under Section 24 is that the party who applies under Section 24 "has. no independent income sufficient for her or his support". "it is only when it is established that the party applying has no independent income sufficient for her or his support that an order for pendente lite maintenance can be made against the non-applicant.

( 4 ) IN addition, under Section 24 expenses of the proceedings can be ordered to be paid.

( 5 ) WHAT has happened in this case is that two proceedings are pending between the parties. One is a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the wife against the husband, and the other is a petition under Section 13 (l) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act by the husband that the wife has deserted him.

( 6 ) I have been informed that both these proceedings have been consolidated for the purpose of trial.

( 7 ) BEFORE me also there are two orders paed by the Additional District Judge, one in Section 9 proceedings and the other in Section 13 proceedings. Both the orders were passed on the same date.

( 8 ) WHAT the Additional District Judge has done is that he has directed Rs. 500. 00 as litigation expenses and Rs. 150. 00 per month as pendente lite maintenance with effect from 2/4/1983.

( 9 ) THE husband is a ticket examiner in the northern railways. He says before me that his total emoluments plus the other salary allowance comes to Rs. 1200. 00 per month. Out of this deductions are made on account of provident fund, insurance etc. and his take-home pay is about Rs. 1100. 00 per month. It is also stated before me that large number of proceedings were instituted inter se parties, as a result, the husband says that he has suffered a lot. That may be so, what I am concerned with in this matter is whether the order passed by the Additional District Judge needs to be revised, or not.

( 10 ) THERE were proceedings inter se parties under Section 125 Cr. P. C. In those proceedings, as there were two sons born to the parties, who at the time of the proceedings under Section 125 Cr. P. O. , were still minors, an order was made that a sum of Rs. 500. 00 be paid as maintenance of the children. In those proceedings no maintenance was granted in favour of the wife.

( 11 ) IT is also stated that both the children born to the parties have become major and so the orders under Section 125 Cr. P. C. are no more in operation.

( 12 ) IT is urged before me by Mr. Wig that in the proceedings which were taken under Section 125 Cr. P. C. the wife had also claimed maintenance for herself. That maintenance was declined. It is therefore suggested that in view of the fact that the courts have declined to give her maintenance inspite of the fact that a revision was filed against the order declining her maintenance under Section 125 Cr. P. C. , which led to a further Criminal Misc. (M) in this Court, in which also maintenance was declined by an order passed by J. D. Jain, J. on 12/12/1984 passed in Criminal Misc. (M) 944 of 1984, the wife should not be given any maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act also.

( 13 ) THE main plank of arguments before me for not paying litigation expenses and pen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document