Vineet Saran, J. - (1.) The petitioner No. 1 Smt. Bindu Devi and respondent No. 2 Mahendra Prasad were married on 26.2.1990. Mahendra Prasad filed Original Suit No. 54 of 2001 for decree of divorce on the ground of the petitioner No. 1 having deserted him. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner No. 1-wife as well as petitioner No. 2-minor son filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 claiming maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- per month for the wife and Rs. 2,500/- per month for minor son plus a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as lump sum amount towards litigation expenses. This amount was claimed on the basis that the husband was employed as a Junior Engineer and was earning Rs. 20,000/- per month, besides having agricultural income to the tune of about Rs. 25,000/- per month. The husband filed objections claiming that, though he was a Junior Engineer in the Irrigation Department and was getting salary of about Rs. 6,0007,000/- per month but, he also had the liability to maintain his aged parents, younger sisters and brothers. It was further stated by the husband that the petitioner No. 1 was a post graduate and was running a coaching institute, from which she had earning of Rs. 10,000-15,000/- per month. Besides this, it was also stated that the parents of the wife as well to do persons and were fully capable of maintaining the petitioners.
(2.) After holding that the husband could not prove the independent source of income of the wife, the trial court, on the basis of the income admitted by the petitioner as Rs. 6,000-7000/- per month, awarded a meagre sum of Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance for the wife and Rs. 2,000/- as lump sum amount towards litigation expenses. The maintenance to the minor son was denied on the ground that the same was not within the ambit of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 25.11.2002 the petitioners have filed this writ petition with the prayer that the petitioner No. 1 be granted Rs. 5,000/- per month as maintenance and petitioner No. 2 Rs. 2,500/- per month as maintenance, besides a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards litigation expenses etc.
(3.) I have heard Sri P.K. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Sri M.A. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 (husband) and have perused the record. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the; learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at. the admission stage itself.;