JUDGMENT 1. - The appellant-original petitioner has filed this appeal against the order dated Feb. 9,1994 passed by the Family Court, Jodhpur under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 enhancing the amount of interim maintenance from Rs. 100/- to Rs. 250/- and directing the petitioner (husband) to pay the amount of travelling expenses for two persons and Rs. 50/- for each date of adjournment on which the respondent-wife remains present or she is required to remain present. 2. Earlier, on the application filed by the respondent-wife, as per order dated Jan. 8,1990, an amount of Rs. 100/- p.m. for interim maintenance was ordered to be paid to the respondent-wife and further an amount of Rs. 50/- as and by way of interim maintenance for the minor son who was with the respondent-wife was ordered to be paid from Aug. 21, 1987. Thereafter, the respondent-wife filed another application praying for enhancement of the interim maintenance and also for amount of expenses for the purposes of attending the proceedings. The family Court, after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that the income of the husband was between Rs. 1,500/- to Rs. 1,800/- p.m. The Family Court held that the respondent-wife had no independent source of income and, therefore, she was required to be paid interim maintenance and also the travelling expenses as indicated hereinabove. It is against this order that this appeal is filed. 3. On April 8, 1994 when this appeal came up for hearing before this Court, the following order was passed:- [Coram : J.R. Chopra & P.K. Palli, JJ.] "Heard. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the maintenance of Rs. 250/- p.m. does not need any interference and, therefore, there is no force in this appeal. However, so far as remaining part of order about grant of expenses in coming and going alongwith one more person is concerned, notice be issued to the respondent, returnable within four weeks." 4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.The contention that the expression 'the expenses of the proceeding' occurring in Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 would not cover the travelling expenses cannot be accepted. It may be noted that the expression used is not the expenses of litigation. The expression used by the Legislature is the expenses of the proceeding. It may be noted that the expression used is not the expenses of litigation. The expression used by the Legislature is the expenses of the proceeding. The expression would cover all types of expenses which are reasonably required to be incurred by the party for prosecuting or defending the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This expression cannot be given truncated meaning as is sought to be contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. We are fortified in our view by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anita Laxmi Narayan Singh v. Laxmi Narayan Singh, reported in AIR 1992 SC 1148 . Therein an ex- parte decree of divorce was passed against the wife. During the course of the proceedings before the Family Court, the Family Court had awarded an amount of Rs. 700/- for travelling expenses and additional amount of Rs. 150/- per day if the wife was to stay for more than one day at Bombay, which was the place of the residence of the husband and where the proceedings were initiated. The Supreme Court held that the order passed by the Family Court was far from satisfactory and had resulted in gross denial of justice to the wife. As observed by the Supreme Court, the order made it impossible for the wife to meet the expenses of frequent visits to Bombay and facilitated an ex-parte decree of divorce in favour of the husband. After making these observations, the Supreme Court set aside the ex-parte decree of divorce and ordered that the proceedings be transferred from Family Court, Bombay to the District Court, Ghaziabad and directed that the matter be proceeded further in accordance with law. Thus, by necessary implication, it has got to be held that it is within the competence of the Court entertaining and considering the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to award travelling expenses and also the expenses for staying at the place where the other side (i.e. in this case wife) is required to come. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order of interim maintenance once passed could not be modified by the Family Court. The contention cannot be accepted. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the order of interim maintenance once passed could not be modified by the Family Court. The contention cannot be accepted. The jurisdiction to grant interim maintenance ensures with the Court till the proceedings are pending and during the pendency of the proceedings, the Court, if satisfied, may modify its own order. With utmost respect, we do not agree with the view taken by the learned Singh Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Bharti Namdeo v. Shiv Narain, reported in (1982) 1 D.M.C. 71. The learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has erroneously applied the analogy of the provisions of the Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It may be noted that the Section 125 Cr.P.C. does not provide for maintenance during the proceedings in matrimonial disputes. It is an independent provision. Therefore, it was necessary for the Legislature to make provision for modification of the amount of maintenance by inserting the provision of Section 127 Cr.P.C. In the case of interim maintenance, no such provision is necessary because by necessary implication, the Court will have the jurisdiction to modify the amount of interim maintenance so long as the proceeding continue. In this respect, reference may be made to a S.B. decision of this Court in the case of Devki v. Purshotam Kewalia, reported in AIR 1973 Raj. 2 wherein it is interalia held that in exercise of the discretionary power conferred upon the Court under the provisions of Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Court may vary the order of interim maintenance if the circumstances of the case justifies the variation. This could also be done by the Court in its inherent power as held in the aforesaid S.B. decision of this Court. We are in respectful agreement with this view taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court in the aforesaid decision. 6. Reliance placed by the learned counsel for the appellant on a D.B. decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of R.S. Choudhary v. Seems Bai, reported in (1989) 1 D.M.C. 89 is of no help to the appellant. In that case, the wife had claimed an amount of Rs. 6. Reliance placed by the learned counsel for the appellant on a D.B. decision of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of R.S. Choudhary v. Seems Bai, reported in (1989) 1 D.M.C. 89 is of no help to the appellant. In that case, the wife had claimed an amount of Rs. 100/- as and by way of interim maintenance and yet the learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court awarded maintenance of Rs. 250/- In this factual background, the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that such a prayer awarding an amount in excess of the amount claimed could not be granted. Hence this decision is of no help to the appellant petitioner.No other contention is raised.There is no substance in this appeal. Hence, the same is dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******