GAJAPATI NAIK Vs. DUKHNASHINI NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claim to interim maintenance by the wife and the two minor children of the petitioner is the subject matter in this revision petition. The opposite parties, the wife and the two minor children of the petitioner, filed Title Suit No. 50 of 1978 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Bargarh against the petitioner for realisation of Rs. 23,700/- towards maintenance. The petitioner in his written statement admitted the relationship but contested the claim on various grounds. In the said suit the opposite parties also filed a petition under Section 151, C. P. C. claiming interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/-per month (Rs. 200/- for the wife and Rs. 50/- for each of the childern). The said petition having been allowed by the learned Subordinate Judge by his order dated 13-5-1980, this revision petition has been filed by the petitioner,

(2.) In their application for interim maintenance the opposite parties averred inter alia that Dukhanashini (Opp. party No. 1) is the legally married wife of the petitioner and Praphula and Kalyani (Opp, Parties 2 and 3) are the two children born out of their wedlock, that the petitioner ill-treated them and drove them out of his house some time in December, 1975 and since then they are living in the house of the father of the opposite party No. 1 completely at his mercy. They further alleged in the said petition that the petitioner after driving out the opposite parties from his house married one Bedamati and has been leading a conjugal life with her in the same house. Even he has settled some lands belonging to the family in favour of Bedamati but has made no arrangement for the maintenance of the opposite parties. The opposite parties further stated that since they have no independent source of income to meet their minimum necessities an order for interim maintenance may be passed by the Court. The petitioner in his objection to the said application for interim maintenance denied the allegations made in the application filed by the opposite parties. He stated that he is ready and willing to take the opposite parties to his company and maintain them within the resources at his disposal. He further stated that he is a poor man and has no other source of income excepting only 2.71 acres of land and it will be extremely difficult on his part to pay any interim maintenance.

(3.) Both the parties filed affidavits and documents in support of their averments made by them. The learned Subordinate Judge on a consideration of the materials allowed the application for interim maintenance as stated above. The impugned order is challenged on the following grounds:-