- (1.) List has been revised. None appears for the revisionist. Heard Sri Chandra Bhan Gupta, holding brief of Sri Rakesh Tiwari, learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A. and also perused the material on record.
(2.) Maintenance allowance of Rs. 300 per month was allowed to the revisionist by the Additional Principle Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar vide judgment and order dated 1.11.1993. This judgment and order is challenged on the ground that the court below has failed to give specific finding regarding grounds on which the wife was entitled to claim maintenance allowance although living separately. Learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 contends that in her application, the wife had specifically stated that she was tortured both mentally and physically for giving less dowry and attempt to kill by burning was made and the case under Section 498, I.P.C. was pending in which the husband was being prosecuted, May it be so, the court below was required to give specific finding if the wife had sufficient reason to live separately so as to entitle her to claim maintenance allowance. It is fairly conceded by the learned Counsel for the parties that such finding has not been given by the court below. In this view of the matter, the revision deserves to be allowed and order of the court below deserves to be set aside.
(3.) The revision is hereby allowed and impugned order dated 1.11.1993 is set aside and the case is remanded and the court below is directed to give specific finding on the question if the wife has sufficient ground to live separately so as to entitle to her maintenance allowance and thereafter dispose of the case in accordance with law. The court below shall dispose of the case within three months from today.;