IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH (29TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRP No.2181 of 2009 Between: Vavililolanu Padma … Petitioner And: Vavilikolanu Laxmamma … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.2181 of 2009 ORDER: This revision is ﬁled assailing the order dated 09.04.2009 in IA No.1114 of 2008 in OS No.222 of 2008 on the ﬁle of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda, wherein the said application ﬁled by the respondent/plaintiﬀ under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act claiming interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month was allowed in part awarding Rs.4,000/- per month. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The respondent herein/plaintiﬀ ﬁled suit for maintenance against the petitioner/defendant, who is her daughter-in-law. It is stated that the petitioner’s husband Raghava Rao who was working as School Assistant Teacher died while in service on 02.06.2003 leaving behind his mother-plaintiff and wife-defendant as legal heirs and that being educated woman, defendant secured job as Junior Assistant in the Land Acquisition Oﬃce, Collectorate, Hyderabad on compassionate grounds and is drawing monthly salary of Rs.9,000/- besides family pension of Rs.7,000/- per month The respondent/plaintiﬀ alleges that her daughter-in-law, the defendant is not taking care of the plaintiﬀ and that the plaintiﬀ is left to survive at the mercy of her daughters. The plaintiﬀ ﬁled IA No.1114 of 2008 seeking interim maintenance pending disposal of the suit. The petitioner herein opposed the same inter-alia contending that the plaintiﬀ has got another son, who is working as lecturer in a private college and that she is having landed property and that she is getting income of Rs.3,00,000/- per year from agriculture land and fruit bearing trees standing in the said land. Though the respondent admits that she is having another son, who is doing private job, but however would contend that she is not being looked after even by the second son nor by her daughters and is not having any property or assets for her sustenance. The question as to whether or not the plaintiﬀ is entitled for any maintenance and if so, to what amount is a matter to be considered by the trial Court as the suit is still pending. This Court while admitting the revision petition granted interim stay subject to the condition of the petitioner paying half of the arrears of maintenance and also to continue to pay at the same rate of Rs.2000/- per month. It is stated that the interim order is being complied with. 4. As the question as to whether or not the plaintiﬀ is possessed of any properties and having any source of income as alleged by the defendant and whether or not the plaintiff is entitled for maintenance is a matter to be considered on evidence, it is felt inexpedient to go into the merits of the matter at the interlocutory stage. The trial Court is therefore directed to dispose of the suit itself within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, having regard to the fact that the suit was ﬁled in the year 2008 and the plaintiﬀ is a senior citizen, who has crossed the age of 70 years. Till such time the suit is disposed of, the interim order granted by this Court on 09.06.2009 shall remain in force and the defendant shall continue to pay Rs.2000/- towards interim maintenance to the plaintiﬀ before 6 th of every succeeding month. 5. In the result, the civil revision petition is disposed of. No order as costs. __________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 29.11.2011 bss