The duty of the father to maintain his wife and children was a central legal principle established in the judgment.

Common Order:

1. The revision petitioner/husband has filed these revision petitions as against the order dated 26. 2007 in I.A.Nos.104 and 105 of 2007 in I.D.O.P.No.156 of 2006 by the Principal District Judge, Tiruvellore in directing the revision petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- towards interim maintenance to the respondent/wife and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards litigation expenses and further to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- per month each to the children of the revision petitioner/husband from the date of filing of the inter -locutory applications till the disposal of original I.D.O.P.No.156 of 2006.

.2. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/husband submits that the learned Principal District Judge has ignored the principles laid down under Section 36 of Divorce Act 1869 while passing orders in I.A.Nos.104 of 2007 and 105 of 2007 and that the trial Court has not taken note of the fact that the take home salary of the revision petitioner/husband is only Rs.2,200/-and that the respondent/wife was employed as a teacher at the time of filing of the application for interim maintenance and this has not been considered by the trial Court while fixing the quantum of maintenance in both the applications and that the revision petitioner/husband does not have wherewith all capacity to pay the monthly maintenance awarded by the trial Court and therefore prays for allowing these revision petitions to prevent aberration of justice.

3. The trial Court, while passing order in I.A.Nos. 104 of 2007 and 105 of 2007 has directed the revision petitioner/husband to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- towards interim maintenance to the respondent/wife and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses and a sum of Rs.2000/- per month to his two children.

4. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner/husband submits that the revision petitioner is an Electrician in the Ambattur Municipality and that his take home salary is only Rs.1171/- as per the salary slip issued by the Ambattur Municipality in December 2007 and therefore, the revision petitioner/husband has no sufficient income to pay the maintenance amount as ordered by the trial Court.

5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/wife submits that as per the pay certificate of Ambattur Municipality dated January 2007 , the revision petitioner/husbands total salary is Rs.9,951/-and that his deduction is around Rs.8,234/- and take home salary of the revision petitioner/husband after deduction is only Rs.1717/- and that the revision petitioner/husband has paid only a portion of the amount ordered towards maintenance relating to the period from 3. 2007 to 18. 2007 and still there is sizeable chunk of the maintenance amount to be paid by the revision petitioner/husband and the revision petitioner/husband is duty bounden to maintain the respondent/wife and his two children on any score.

6. In this connection, it is to be pointed out that Section 36 of the Divorce Act 1869 speaks of Alimony Pendente Lite and a reading of Section 36 of the said Act clearly indicates that the said Section does not provide for payment of maintenance pendente lite for children and in fact it only speaks of maintenance to the wife, in the considered opinion of this Court. However, in regard to the children maintenance, education and custody under Section 41 of the Divorce Act 1869 deals with the same. Therefore, the revision petitioner/husband cannot wriggle out of the situation in regard to the payment of maintenance to the wife and to his two children.

.7. However, at this juncture, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/husband submits that the out of two female children, one is aged about 20 years and therefore in view of the attaining majority, the revision petitioner/husband is not bounden to pay the maintenance to his daughter. The said argument of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner cannot be countenanced because of the fact that the