THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.1882 OF 2008 DATED: 21-12-2010 Between: Y.Himabindu. ..... PETITIONER And Y.Mallikarjuna Rao. .....RESPONDENT ORDER: There is no representation for the respondent. This revision is disposed of by hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner only. The respondent herein is the husband. The revision petitioner is the wife. The respondent laid O.P.No.83 of 2005 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, seeking divorce. The wife laid the petition in I.A.No.1248 of 2005 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. She claimed interim maintenance at Rs.5000/- per month for her. She also claimed interim maintenance at Rs.2000/- per month for each of the two children. Through the impugned order, the learned trial Judge granted interim maintenance at Rs.2000/- in favour of the wife. The claim of the maintenance for the two children was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision is laid. The learned counsel for the petitioner-wife pointed out that the two children of the wife and the husband are studying Lower Kindergarten and Upper kindergarten and that it is necessary for the wife to maintain the two children. It is curious why the trial Judge did not find it necessary to grant interim maintenance to the two children. When the two children are studying Lower Kindergarten and Upper Kindergarten, each of them would certainly be entitled to interim maintenance at Rs.750/- per month. At the same time, the learned counsel for the petitioner-wife herself pointed out that the main case was dismissed by the trial Court. Where the very main case stood dismissed, the right of the wife to seek maintenance or interim maintenance for the two minor children would not arise. This revision, therefore is liable to be dismissed. At the same time, it is clear that the two children are minors and certainly are entitled to maintenance. I make it clear that the two children would have been entitled to interim maintenance at Rs.750/- per month, had the main case been pending. As the main case stood disposed of, this revision, however, is closed. No costs. __________________ K.G.SHANKAR, J 21st December, 2010. Tsy