JUDGMENT Tulzapurkar, J. — Special leave granted. 0 2. We have heard counsel on either side. We are satisfied that the High Court has unnecessarily interfered with the finding of fact recorded by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No.101 of 1975 on the point that the husband had failed and neglected to maintain his wife and had ill-treated her. However, it does appeal that the question of quantum of to the husbands income does not seem to have been properly considered by the Session Court. We therefore set aside the impugned order of the High Court and sent the case back to the session Judge for disposal according to law on the point of quantum of maintenance to be awarded to the wife and the child. Parties may be permitted to lead evidence in that behalf and for that purpose the Session Judge may have the evidence recorded and certified through the learned Trial magistrate. In the meantime we direct that the husband shall pay Rs. 50 p.m. to the wife as interim maintenance which amount shall be deposited by the husband by the husband in the Session Court. Mainpur, for September 1980 on or before October 5, 1980 and for succeeding month on or before the 5th of the following month. For Citation : (1982)1 SCC 437