JUDGMENT
N.C. Jain, J.
1. This revision petition has been directed against the order of the matrimonial Court declining to grant maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses on the ground that the respondent-husband was prepared to keep the petitioner. The maintenance pendente lite has been declined on the ground that the husband offered before the Court that he was prepared to keep the wife. The case of the wife is that she is residing separately for the last about ten years. On the other hand, the case of the husband is that it is only for the last five years that they are separately residing. Whether the period is of five years or ten years, it will not be material in view of the fact that the parties are residing separately for a long time The offer of the husband before the Court should not have weighed with the matrimonial Court to decline the maintenance pendente lite. The offer could be genuine or it might not have been genuine. This question would be gone into after recording the entire evidence in the case. In my view the wife is entitled to a reasonable maintenance and the question whether the husband is entitled to a decree of restitution of conjugal rights or not would be gone into after recording the entire evidence. As regards grant of maintenance pendente lite, the wife should have been granted some maintenance. Since no finding has been recorded on the point of income of the husband, it would be more apt that the case is remanded to the matrimonial Court for granting maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses. This would be done after the parties file their affidavits along with the documentary evidence.
2. In the light of the observations made above, this revision petition is allowed. The case is remanded to the materimonial Court for a fresh decision. No costs The application for the grant of maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses would be decided within six weeks from today. A copy of the order would be given Dasti to the counsel for the parties on payment of requisite copying charges. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the matrimonial Court on February 6, 1990.
