ORDER

1. The present misc. appeal has been preferred against the order dated 25.10.2021 passed by the Family Court, Rajsamand whereby the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 preferred by the appellant-Smt. Rekha was partly allowed. Vide the impugned order, the learned Family Court rejected the prayer of the appellant for maintenance and allowed only an amount of Rs.3000/- as cost of litigation for each date when she would attend the court proceedings.

2. We have gone through the impugned order and the material available on record.

3. The Family Court has rejected the prayer of the appellant for maintenance only on the assertion of the respondent-husband that he had been terminated from his job during the Corona pandemic period and had not been in job since then. The said rejection of the learned Family Court cannot be said to be in consonance with the basic principles of law. It is the legal obligation of the husband to maintain his wife as held by the Apex Court in the case of Pratima Devi Vs. Anand Prakash reported in 2019 Supreme (SC) 2310. It is equally a settled proposition of law that during the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court an inte