THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION Nos.1538 &1935 of 2009 COMMON ORDER: Both the revisions are directed against the order, dated 13.02.2009, passed by the Family Court, Secunderabad in I.A.No.906 of 2008 in O.P.No.427 of 2008. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in C.R.P.No.1538 of 2009. The petitioner and the respondent are spouses. The latter filed the O.P. under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short ‘the Act’) with a prayer to grant maintenance at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month. She pleaded that the marriage between them took place in the year 2002 at Guravayoor, Trisur District, Kerala and in the recent past, the petitioner neglected to maintain her. She also pleaded that the respondent abruptly dropped her at the house of her parents on 28.03.2008 and ever since then, she is living at that place. The salary of the petitioner is said to be Rs.91,925/-. The respondent filed I.A.No.906 of 2008 for interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month. She pleaded that she does not have the income of her own. The petitioner denied the allegations. It was urged that the respondent herself is employed in I.D.B.I. Bank drawing a salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. He further pleaded that he has to maintain his parents and he is ready and willing to maintain the respondent also. Through the order under revisions, the trial Court awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- as maintenance to the respondent. While the petitioner challenges that order by filing C.R.P.No.1538 of 2009, the respondent seeks enhancement thereof by filing C.R.P.No.1935 of 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. The petitioner and the respondent are living separately on account of their strained relationship. The respondent claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month by filing O.P.No.427 of 2008. As an interim measure, she filed I.A.No.906 of 2008 with a prayer to grant maintenance at the same rate. The trial Court took note of the emoluments being drawn by the petitioner as well as the status of the respondent and awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/-. The subject matter of the O.P. itself is the claim for maintenance. Evidence has to be adduced by the parties in support of their respective contentions. The interim relief cannot be the same as the principal relief. A decent balance has been struck by the trial Court. This Court is of the view that the order does not warrant interference. As regards the claim made by the respondent for legal expenses, the trial Court made a specific reference to the absence of any provision in the Act. It is not in dispute that the Act does not contain a provision similar to Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The civil revision petitions are accordingly dismissed. The trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the O.P. itself, as early as possible and not later than three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:24.08.2009 kdl