( 1 ) THE appellant, who is the wife-defendant in the husband's suit for judicial separation, moved the Court to grant of interim maintenance and for litigation expenses under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Court rejected the prayer for maintenance, but granted a sum of Rs. 100/- as against the prayer for rs. 300/- on the ground of expenses in the proceedings. Now the wife has come up in appeal praying that a monthly allowance should have been granted for her support and the expenses of the proceedings should have been granted more liberally, the husband for his part has filed a cross-objection against the grant of rs. 100/- for the expenses of the proceedings. The questions for decision are:

(1) Whether, simply because the wife has been and is being supported by her father and by her maternal uncle, she is not entitled to a grant of money payable by the husband; (2) Whether she being one capable, with some effort, of earning her support the husband can still be compelled to make a payment; (3) The quantum of monthly payment for support, in case the appeal is to be allowed; and (4) Whether there is any substance in the cross-objection.

( 2 ) THE facts of this case are of the usual kind with the refinement that the wife has been charged with physical violence. It is said that the husband's relations have started a case against the wife for hurt or grievous hurt by throwing some kitchen implement at her father-in-law. Whatever the truth of these allegations and counter-allegations, and whatever the merits of the original prayer, it does appear that matters have gone quite far between the parties,

( 3 ) IT is not questioned that, in principle in a case like this, the wife is entitled, during the pendency of the proceedings, to an allowance for support and also to a lump grant towards her expenses in the proceedings. These differ from the permanent alimony that may in time be granted under the next section. Here it is a provisional arrangement to enable her to keep herself alive till the final orders in the proceedings and also contest, if she chooses, the suit filed by her husband. It is conceivable that in certain circumstances, the husband may be entitled to a grant for support and expenses to be paid by the wife; but in a society like ours that would be a much rarer happening than the present situation while the wife is praying for the grant.

( 4 ) THE test is whether the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has any independent income sufficient for her or his support and to bear the necessary expenses of the proceedings. It does happen that, even in the absence of independent income, the party manages to keep alive and even to contest in law-courts on the help provided by relations or friends. But while considering whether any grant should be ordered, the good-will or charity of relations and friends cannot be taken into account. What is to be examined is whether there is sufficient independent income by which is meant actual income and not merely possible or potential income. It is admitted in this case there is no actual independent income of the appellant. Whether or not the father or maternal uncle have been helping her willingly or from a mere sense of duty, the Courts cannot compel them to shoulder this additional burden. Obviously whatever they give, cannot become the independent income of the appellant,

( 5 ) THERE are two other circumstances which, the husband seems to feel, would justify his refusal to give anything. Firstly, that the woman's behaviour has not been correct. For one thing, the whole matter is under the consideration of the courts; for another, it is nobody's case that the woman is living in adultery which is the only possible excuse for the refusal of maintenance in the circumstances in case there is no sufficient independent income. The other circumstances suggested is that when she left her husband's place, the wife took away some ornaments. Though there is no material in