THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 4606 of 2009 DATE: 24.6.2011 BETWEEN: Movva Uma Maheswari petitioner And Movva Challaiah Chowdary Respondent Counsel for the petitioner : Sri P Anand Seshu Counsel for the respondent: Sri G Dharma Rao The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 4606 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein is respondent/wife. The present revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 26.8.2009 passed in I.A. No. 877 of 2004 in HMOP No. 79 of 2004 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Guntur insofar as granting the maintenance of Rs.6500/- per month and Rs.5000/- towards legal expenses from the date of order. The respondent/husband filed a petition in HMOP No. 79 of 2004 under Section 13 (1) (ia) of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage. In the said O.P, the wife/petitioner herein filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in I.A No. 877 of 2004 for grant of interim maintenance of Rs.15,000/- per month and Rs. 10,000/- towards legal expenses. The Court below after hearing both the parties and considering the rival contentions allowed the said petition granting interim maintenance of Rs.6500/- per month and Rs.5000/- towards legal expenses to the petitioner- wife from the date of the order. Hence, the present revision challenging the order insofar as granting maintenance from the date of order instead of from the date of filing of the application. Learned counsel for petitioner-wife submitted that the application for grant of interim maintenance in I.A No. 877 of 2004 was filed on 22.7.2004 and she is entitled to receive the interim maintenance from the date of filing the application and the Court below erred in granting the interim maintenance from the date of order i.e., 26.8.2009. In support of his claim, he further submits that in terms of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, any application for grant of pendente lite maintenance and legal expenses shall be disposed of within a period of 60 days from the date of service of the notice and if the orders are not passed by the Courts for different reasons, the person who is entitled for maintenance, cannot be deprived of his/her right for maintenance. He further submits that in the present case the interim application was received by the husband/respondent herein on 22.7.2004 and the petitioner- wife is entitled to receive the maintenance from the date of filing of the application itself. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent- husband, submitted that the petitioner-wife is working as a teacher in a private school and has means to maintain herself. He further submitted that the respondent-husband is drawing the net salary of Rs.10150/- only and is not in a position to pay the maintenance at the rate of Rs.6500/- and filed a copy of salary slip of the respondent-husband for the month of September, 2004. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent. Though the learned counsel for respondent husband orally states that the petitioner is working as a teacher in a private school and has means to maintain herself, has not adduced any evidence before the Court below or before this Court. Further, a perusal of the salary slip of the respondent – husband would indicate that his total earnings for the month are Rs.44,825/- out of which there are different deductions to a tune of Rs.34,675/-, i.e., an amount of Rs.7000/- was deducted towards V.P.F, an amount of Rs.7500/- was deducted towards salary advance, an amount of Rs.1695/- was deducted towards car loan and an amount of Rs.12,183/- is deducted towards income tax, apart from other deductions. Having regard to the fact that the respondent-husband is working as Senior Construction Manager in Indian oil Corporation and his monthly salary being Rs.44825/-, actually this Court is of the opinion that the maintenance granted by the Court below is not just and it requires enhancement, however, since there is no application or claim made by the petitioner-wife, this Court is not inclined to enhance the interim maintenance. The Section 24 8 (v) of the Act, provides that the interim maintenance should be awarded from the date when the application is actually moved. Further Section 8 of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 2001 (Act 49 of 2001 provides that the application for the payment of the expenses of the proceedings and such monthly sum during the proceeding, shall as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of service of notice on the wife or the husband, as the case may be. Thus, the Court below erred in recording a finding that the main petition was restored to file on 26.3.2008 and the present I.A. was restored to file on 2.4.2008. The Court below ought to have granted the interim maintenance from the date of application instead of from the date of order. For the foregoing reasons, the revision is allowed and the order under revision is modified only to the extent of granting maintenance from the date of filing of application instead of from the date of order, and confirmed in all other aspects. The respondent-husband is directed to pay the maintenance at the rate of Rs.6500/- as ordered by the Court below from the date of filing of application i.e., July, 2004 and shall pay the arrears at that rate till date within a period of eight weeks from today and continue to pay the same regularly before 10th of every succeeding month. No costs. ______________ V ESWARAIAH,J DATE: 24.6.2011 TVK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V ESWARAIAH C.R.P. NO. 4606 of 2009 DATE: 24.6.2011