Under S.24 of Hindu Marriage Act court must consider income actually earned by the parties and not what a party could have earned by putting in more labour, capital and all that.
Under Section 24, however, the matter which must be considered by the Court is the income actually earned by the parties and not what a party could have earned by putting in more labour, capital and all that. It is, therefore, manifest that the learned Judge did not pass the order "having regard to" the actual income of the husband, though under Section 24 he was obliged to have regard to the same. The impugned order, therefore, was passed not in accordance with the provisions of law, but in breach thereof.
6. It is true that the wife in her application for pendente lite maintenance has stated that the husband "is a medical practitioner and has got a lucrative practice and earns at least Rs. 8,000/- per month" and that he also "owns a fairly big house at Calcutta" which fetches and is capable of fetching decent income". But in the affidavit in support of this application all the statements in the applicationhave been affirmed as "true to the best of my knowledge and belief", without specifying in any way which statements are true to her knowledge and which are true to her belief and also without stating the grounds of such belief. Under the provisions of Order 19, Rule 3(i) of Civil P.C., in affidavits relating to interlocut
