ORDER :- This Civil Revision is directed against an order passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Allahabad dated 30th March, 1978 on an application made under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In a suit filed by the husband for the dissolution of the marriage under S.13 of the Act, the wife made an application for maintenance, pendente lite and expenses for legal proceedings. After considering the respective cases the court below passed an order directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs. 100/- per month as maintenance and Rs. 100/- for expenses in the legal proceedings. The wife aggrieved by the above order has come up to this Court in revision stating that the court below has committed material irregularity in exercise of jurisdiction in passing the aforesaid order. It was urged that certain materials on record have not been taken into consideration with the result that a completely erroneous order has been passed.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Normally, the question as to what should be the quantum of maintenance and the amount of expense for legal proceeding is a pure question of fact to be decided upon by the trial Court. The Court trying the suit is in the best position to assess as to what should be the amount of maintenance and also estimate the amount of expense that ought to be provided to the party asking for it. S.24 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for payment of maintenance pendente lite and expenses of the proceedings. It lays down :

"Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay to the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding, and monthly during the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioners own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the court to be reasonable".

3. A number of cases were cited showing the mode and method of calculation of the quantum of maintenance allowance and the expenses for legal proceedings. Reference was also made to the provisions of Section 36 of the Divorce Act, which provides for alimony pendente lite. Under the above Act, only the wife is to be paid an alimony pendente lite not exceeding one-fifth of the husbands average net income for 3 years preceding the date of the order. The Hindu Marriage Act is silent about this. It cannot be visualised for a moment that the framers of the Act were not aware of the provisions in the Divorce Act. If they did not provide for a maximum limit in the Marriage Act, it must be presumed that this was done with an intent to leave the matter to the discretion of the Court. I am, therefore, of the opinion that neither a minimum nor a maximum amount in terms of percentage can be fixed for the maintenance allowance under the Hindu Marriage Act. The quantum will always depend on the circumstances of the case. The Legislature in its wisdom did not want that there should be any restriction on the Court and therefore, no percentage of the income was fixed. Sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, however, makes it clear that no amount as maintenance is to be paid either to the wife or the husband, as the case may be where they have sufficient income for her or his support and the necessary expenses for the legal proceeding. Where, however, either of them does not have sufficient income, the Court may, having regard to the income of the parties, pass an order for the payment of monthly amount and the expenses for litigation as may be reasonable. It is clear from the above that both parties have income the Court must take that into consideration before ordering the payment of any maintenance allowance or expenses for proceedings. If the applicant has the income and the opposite party does not, and the latter makes an application the Court is

Click Here to Read the rest of this document