- (1.) Present revision petition has been filed against an order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh vide which the application moved on behalf of the minor children for the grant of maintenance has been allowed.
(2.) The petitioner who is father of the minors has challenged the order firstly on the ground that under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short the Act) legitimate or illegitimate child is entitled to claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is minor and therefore, as in the present case the minors arc being looked after by their mother it was not open to the Court to have directed the maintenance claim to be paid by the petitioner as the word used in the Act is 'or' and not 'and'.
(3.) This contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is totally misconceived. The petition has been filed claiming maintenance from father and not from the mother and therefore, the maintenance is not claimed from both the parties. Even otherwise, word 'or' has to be read as 'and' and in case both the father and mother are capable to maintain the child the liability can be fixed on both, therefore, this contention is rejected.;