IMPORTANT POINT
Notwithstanding any expenditure being incurred by the husband for himself and his family, he is morally and legally obliged to maintain his wife and children.

S. Manikumar, J.—Challenge in this appeal is to the order, made in I.A.No.15 of 2014 in H.M.O.P.No.48 of 2014, dated 03.06.2015, on the file of the Family Court, Erode, by which, an interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/-, has been ordered to the wife, to be paid, on or before 5th of every month. Litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- has been ordered. Arrears have been directed to be paid, within three months, from the date of passing of the order.

2. Material on record discloses that appellant-husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.48 of 2015, for divorce. Contending inter alia, that out of the wedlock, a girl child, Devashruthi, was born on 23.03.2001 and that the respondent-wife has no source of income, to meet out the expenses to maintain herself and the child, I.A.No.367 of 2012 in H.M.O.P.No.48 of 2015, has been filed, claiming interim maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month and Rs.25,000/- for litigation expenses. In the said I.A., the respondent-wife has further contended that the appellant-husband did not take care to see the child and herself. The appellant-husband is working as a Project Leader in Mahindra Satyam Company, Chennai and earning Rs.65,000/- per month, as salary. Further contention has also been made that the appellant-husband has agricultural lands in R.S.Nos.21/5, 21/9, 21/10B, 21/10G, 407/14 in Periyapatti Village in Namakkal District, measuring 6.51 Acres. Besides, he has a vacant site in the same village, measuring 30.098 and half Sq.Ft. The respondent-wife has contended that the appellant-husband is earning not less than Rs.25,000/- from agricultural properties and on the whole, getting Rs.90,000/- per month.

3. Opposing the petition for maintenance, appellant-husband has contended that he is the only earning member in his family. He has to spend Rs.35,000/- per month, for family expenses and himself. Apart from the above, he has to pay Rs.10,000/- towards interest, for the loan obtained by him, for his education. He has to clear the bank loan. He has stated that his salary is Rs.35,219/- per month only, and hence, cannot pay Rs.25,000/- as interim maintenance. He has also stated that he does not derive any income from the agricultural properties. That part, the property is under mortgage.

4. Before the Family Court, the appellant-husband has further contended that the respondent-wife has taken 10 Sovereigns of jewels and that his job is not permanent. He is taking treatment for back pain. He has no knowledge of the birth of child. The respondent-wife is doing job work and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. The appellant-husband has further contended that both the respondent-wife and her mother, have landed properties, measuring 3 Acres in Sengapalli Village and 1 Acre in Vagurampatti Village, 5 Acres in Lathuvadi Village, wherein, cash crops are grown regularly and getting huge income. Respondent-wife has put up a new building in Periya Semur Village of Erode District. Mother of the respondent-wife is a staff nurse, getting Rs.40,000/- per month. According to the husband, the respondent-wife has voluntarily deserted him and made a false complaint to the police. For the abovesaid reasons, the appellant-husband has prayed for dismissal of the interim maintenance petition.

5. The respondent-wife has filed a reply to the counter affidvait filed by the appellant-husband, denying the averments, in particular, income derived from the agricultural properties. She contended that the properties at Sengapalli Village, Vagurampatti Village and Periya Semur Village, mentioned in the counter affidavit, do not belong to her and it belongs to her paternal grand mother, maternal uncle and mother respectively and that she has no rights over the said properties. Hence, she has prayed for maintenance before the Family Court.

6. Before the Family Court, two documents, viz., Pagakaraar Pathiram and Complaint receipt, have been marked, on the side of the respondent-wife. Appellant-husband examined himself as RW.1 and marked Ex.R1 - Marr