R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.

1. This appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P.No.283 of 2011 on the file of the Family Court, Palakkad.

2. The respondent in the appeal is the father of the appellant. He is the respondent in O.P.No.283 of 2011 filed in the Family Court. The parties shall be hereinafter referred to as the petitioner and the respondent.

3. The petitioner filed O.P. No. 283 of 2011 in the Family Court claiming an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from the respondent to meet the expenses of her marriage. The respondent filed counter statement denying marital relationship with the mother of the petitioner. He also denied the paternity of the petitioner and also his liability to meet the expenses of her marriage.

4. During the proceedings before the court below, the petitioner and her mother were examined as PW1 and PW2 and Exts.A1 to A28 documents were marked on the side of the petitioner. The respondent was examined as RW1. On appreciating the evidence adduced by the parties, the Family Court found that the appellant who is receiving rent from two buildings owned by her has got sufficient income to meet the expenses of her marriage and therefore dismissed the petition.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner and also the respondent.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the lower court went wrong in coming to the conclusions that the petitioner is a person who earns money and that she is not entitled to claim the expenses of her marriage from the respondent. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent supported the findings made by the lower court. He has submitted that the lower court has rightly dismissed the petition.

7. Section 20(1) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') provides that a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents. Section 20(2) of the Act provides that a legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor. Section 20(3) of the Act states that the obligation of a person to maintain his or her aged or infirm parent or daughter who is unmarried extends so long as the parent or the unmarried daughter, as the case may be, is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property.

8. The respondent denied the marital relationship with the mother of the petitioner. It is immaterial whether there was any valid marriage between the respondent and the mother of the petitioner. As per Sections 20(1) and 20(2) of the Act, the father has obligation to maintain his daughter, whether legitimate or illegitimate.

9. Paternity of the petitioner was denied by the respondent in the counter statement filed by him. However, when he gave evidence as RW1, in the affidavit filed in lieu of examination-in-chief, he conceded that he is the father of the petitioner though she was born in extra marital relationship with her mother. Further, Ext.A1 report containing the result of DNA test also proves that the respondent is the father of the petitioner.

10. Section 20(1) of the Act enjoins upon a Hindu to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children. Section 20(3) of the Act narrows down the legal obligation to maintain an unmarried daughter in so far as she is unable to maintain herself from her own earnings or property. In short, under Section 20, a Hindu is under legal obligation to maintain, amongst others, her unmarried daughter, in so far as such unmarried daughter is unable to maintain herself from her own source of income. This obligation to maintain is personal and legal in character and arises from the existence of the relationship between the parties (Commissioner of Gift Tax v. Indira Devi : 1998 KHC 403 and Viswambharan v. Dhanya : 2005 KHC 119). The right of a minor girl for maintenance from parents after attaining major