G.C.Garg, J.

1. Appellant-wife has moved this application for a direction to the respondent-husband to pay to her the maintenance allowance as ordered by this Court on 5.9.1994 or issue such other direction as may be deemed necessary in the facts and circumstances of this case.

2. In response to notice of Civil Misc., reply has been filed. The respondent also came present in Court and has categorically stated that he is not employed and is not in a position to pay maintenance whatsoever. In other words, the respondent declined to make payment of the maintenance allowance and stated that this Court may pass whatever order it may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case. The respondent further stated that he was earlier employed in a company but on his transfer to Secundrabad, he resigned and is no longer in service and is, therefore, unable to pay the maintenance to the appellant or the minor child who is admittedly living with the appellant-wife.

3. In the similar circumstances as noticed above, the matter was considered on different occasions in Smt. Swarno Devi v. Piara Ram, 1975 H.L.R. 15; Gurdev Kaur v. Dalip Singh, 1980 H.L.R. 240, and Smt. Surinder Kaur v. Balde v Singh, 1980 H.L.R. 514, wherein it was held that when the husband fails to pay maintenance and litigation expenses to the wife, his defence is to be struck off. Since in the present case also, the husband has failed to make the payment of maintenance and litigation expenses to the wife as ordered by this Court and even has categorically expressed his inability to do so by coming in Court personally, his defence is struck off. The consequence is that the appeal of the appellant-wife is to be allowed and the petition Under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent-husband is to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and husbands petition filed under Section 9 of the Act is hereby dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Civil Misc. also stands disposed of accordingly.