Judgment:
Arun Madan, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant at length.
2. The appellant-husband has come up in appeal challenging the award of maintenance and so also the litigation expenses to the wife, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Ajmer. Vide his impugned order dated 11th June, 2001 the Family Court has recorded a positive finding against the appellant by observing that on taking over all view of the matter and also of the status of the husband it fixed an interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month apart from award of litigation expenses of Rs. 1,100/- and Rs. 200/- to be paid on each date of hearing to the wife to enable her to meet the travel expenses from Beawar to Ajmer.
3. Learned Counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that it is the wife who had moved to the Family Court seeking divorce against the husband by filing a petition on the ground alleging cruelty at the instance of the husband and her in-laws. It is under the compelling circumstances that the above petition has been filed as there were demand for dowry, maltreatment besides demand for money. It is under the aforesaid-circumstances, the interim award has been passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), aggrieved by which the present appeal has been preferred.
4. Be that as it may, under Section 24 of the Act there is no bar to the wife, who files the divorce petition before the Family Court to claim interim maintenance. What is required to be established is that if the wife has no independent source of income being dependent on the income of the husband for running the household and if the circumstances of the case are such that there is need to award maintenance to the wife, the Court may in appropriate circumstances, having regard to the petitioner's own income and other relevant factors to the case direct to award the interim maintenance during pendency of proceedings. Prima facie, we are of the view that at this stage since the requirements of Section 24 of the Act are fully established, it would not be proper for us to interfere with the findings recorded by the Family Court. The findings are well reasoned and not open to challenge.
5. The respondent wife had filed an affidavit before the Family Court that she has no independent source of income to sustain herself, whereas the husband has a jeep and earning about Rs. 10,000/- from it and Rs. 20,000/- from ragger business, hence she is entitled to award of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2,500/- per month towards her maintenance, Rs. 5,000/- for litigation expense and Rs. 250/- to meet the travelling cost from Beawar to Ajmer for attending the Court proceedings.
6. In reply, the husband had not disputed the factum of marriage while disputed the other claims made by the wife.
7. Before the Family Court the husband tried to demolish the claim of the wife for award of maintenance on the ground that she is a teacher in a school and having monthly income there from but could not establish this fact by way of any satisfactory evidence. On the basis of the above conclusion, the learned Judge, Family Court recorded a finding that since the husband could not demolish the wife's claim regarding her having no independent income sufficient to sustain herself as she was totally dependent on the income from the husband, she was entitled to award of maintenance, litigation and other expenses as per Section 24 of the Act.
8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the petitioner to comply with the impugned order dated 11th June, 2002 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Ajmer at first instance before he is permitted to contest the proceedings.
9. With the above observations, this petition stands disposed of.