1. Present petition is directed against the order dated 17.12.2008 passed by Additional District Judge, Delhi, on an application filed by the petitioner (wife) under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in HMA No.405/08/06, seeking interim maintenance.

2. Marriage between petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 23.1.2000. Out of their wedlock one daughter was born. Parties are residing separately since the year 2003. The petitioner filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking interim maintenance which was dismissed by the trial court only on the ground that petitioner had misrepresented and mislead the Court and did not approach the Court with clean hands.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was residing in a rented accommodation whereas the address mentioned in the memo of parties is of her parents. Trial court did not find the explanation, rendered by the petitioner, to be satisfactory as the summons were served on the petitioner at the address mentioned in the memo of parties.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has no source of livelihood except `1000/-, which is being received by her pursuant to the order passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in the proceedings filed by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Counsel further submits that besides herself the petitioner has to maintain her minor daughter, who is stated to be nine years of age, for which she is relying upon her family for financial help as well as emotional support.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that trial court has rightly dismissed the application filed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act as the petitioner has given a different address in the memo of parties and a different address has been given in Annexure A-2, which has been filed along with the petition.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and given my thoughtful consideration to the matter. A perusal of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act makes it abundantly clear that the main aim, object and intent is to enable either spouse, who has no independent source of income for his or her support and necessary expenses for proceeding under the Act to claim maintenance and expenses during the pendency of the proceedings in order to avoid any hardship on the person.

7. Courts have all along been extremely sensitive in dealing with cases where parties have approached courts with unclean hands and have suppressed and withheld material facts from the court. No doubt the petitioner has given two addresses, one in the memo of parties and the other in Annexure A-2, which were brought to the notice of the trial court. Learned counsel for the petitioner on a query raised by the trial court had explained that the address mentioned in the memo of parties is the address of the parents of the petitioner and the address mentioned in Annexure A-2 is the address of House No.592/26, West Ram Nagar, Sonipat, Haryana, which has been taken by her on rent.

8. It is not unusual for a young mother, who has to bring up a minor child to fall back and rely upon her parents for financial help, support and security. It is understandable that summons issued to the petitioner at the address of her parents were received by her. It is also not unusual that petitioner would have taken accommodation on rent for the sake of her own independence or for any other reason including paucity of accommodation in her parental house or to allow other family members to live in comfort.

9. While dealing with suppression of facts the court must satisfy itself that the fact, which is suppressed is material for deciding the issue between the parties. Suppression of any fact by itself cannot deny equitable relief much less a relief, sought by the petitioner, in this case on an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which provides relief to a spouse, who has no independent source of income to maintain himself or