JUDGMENT Kuldip Chand Sood, J. (Oral) - This revision petition arises out of the orders of learned district Judge. Kullu and Lahaul Spiti in Civil Suit No. 11 of 2001 dated 7th November. 2001. 2. It appears, plaintiff (respondent herein) Man Dassi filed a suit for maintenance as an indigent person. She claimed Rs.4000 - per month as maintenance allowance. Alongwith the suit an application was filed for the grant of interim maintenance stating that the plaintiff was unable to maintain herself and her children. She has no property or any money to maintain herself. Her husband, had not made any provision for her maintenance, who is legally bound to maintain the respondent-plaintiff. She also pleaded that she had fallen from the stairs in the year 1987 and received spinal injury and therefore, is not in a position to work and to, pursue her normal chores without help. 3. The defendant took up a defence that the parties belong to Swangla Tribe, which is recognised as Schedule Tribe and are governed by Tribal Custom in the matters of marriage, divorce, adoption, succession and maintenance etc. It is further alleged that so far maintenance is concerned, the parties would be governed by "Riwaze-A-Zamindara" and therefore, the suit filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable and he is not obliged to maintain the plaintiff. On merits it was pleaded that the plaintiff is having sufficient funds to maintain herself. It was also stated that plaintiff is not legally wedded wife of defendant, according to the custom of the Lahaul Spiti area. The plaintiff without getting divorce from her earlier husband. Prem Chand. came to defendant and started living with him as his "mistress". It is admitted that out of the relationship between the plaintiff and defendant one son and two daughters were born. The application was also resisted on the similar grounds. 4. Learned trial Court vide his order, impugned, after going through the material placed on record granted maintenance pendant life of Rs. 1000/- per month to the plaintiff from the date of the suit. 5. Learned trial Court took note of the fact that defendant himself has admitted that he is getting a salary of Rs.7000/- per month after deductions. Learned trial Judge observed that though the status of the plaintiff as wife was disputed by the defendant, but in the claim petition No. 104/84. 5. Learned trial Court took note of the fact that defendant himself has admitted that he is getting a salary of Rs.7000/- per month after deductions. Learned trial Judge observed that though the status of the plaintiff as wife was disputed by the defendant, but in the claim petition No. 104/84. which was filed by the plaintiff and defendant jointly, before the claims Tribunal. Mandi. both the plaintiff and defendant claimed, compensation for the death for their son. as parents of the child and therefore, prima facie, observed the learned trial Court, plaintiff is wife of the defendant. The objection of the defendant that plaintiff was not entitled to any maintenance as the parties were not governed by Hindu Law was repelled. 6. Aggrieved, the defendant is in this revision. 7. There is no scope of dispute that parties are Tribal and Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act is not applicable to the parties. Nevertheless, they shall be governed by Hindu Law unless it is shown that the parties are governed by a custom which is contrary to the provision of the Old Hindu Law. The parties are admittedly Hindu though Tribal. Under the Hindu Law a husband is under an obligation to maintain his wife, minor sons, un-married daughters and aged parents. The obligation to maintain this relation is personal in character and arises from to he very existence of the relationship between the parties. (See: Para- 554 of Mulla Hindu Law. Volume-1. published by Butterworths. seventeenth edition). Para - 554 records: "554. Wifes right of maintenance - (I) A wife is entitled to be maintained by her husband whether he possesses property or not. When a man knowingly marries a girl accustomed to a certain style of living, he undertakes the obligation of maintaining her in that style. The maintenance of a wife by her husband is a matter of personal obligation arising from the very existence of the relationship, and quite independent of the possession by the husband of any property, ancestral or self-acquired. The maintenance being a matter of personal obligation, she has no claim for maintenance against her husbands property in the hands of a transferee from him. Nor has she any claim against the government, if his property has been attached under Section 87 and 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1898. as the property of a absconder. The maintenance being a matter of personal obligation, she has no claim for maintenance against her husbands property in the hands of a transferee from him. Nor has she any claim against the government, if his property has been attached under Section 87 and 88 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1898. as the property of a absconder. Her remedy is to obtain a decree of a civil court creating a formal charge on the property. (2) A wife is not entitled, during her husbands lifetime., to be maintained either by her relations or by- her husbands relations even if she has been deserted by him unless they have in their possession property belonging to her husband". 8. It is now well settled that original text of Hindu Law applies to the Tribal People unless any custom to the contrary is proved. It may be noticed that there is nothing in the written statement or in the reply to the application for the grant of interim maintenance to show by what precise custom parties are governed. 9. In Ganesh Mahto & Ors. v. Shiv Charan Mahata &. Ors AIR 1931 Patna 305. a Division Bench of Patna High Court observed that Hindus must be presumed to be governed by Hindu Law except in so far as they prove any custom which is at variance with it. 10. In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the pleadings of the parties, learned district Judge was right in observing that prima-facie the defendant was liable to maintain his wife Man Dassi irrespective of the fact that the parties are Tribals. 11. It may be emphasized that the maintenance granted is only pendent lite and not final maintenance. The question whether the custom by which the parties are governed is derogatory to the rules of Hindu Law. regarding maintenance of wife and children is to be determined in t he suit filed by the plaintiff. 12. It cannot, in the circumstances and facts of this case, be said that the learned trial Court exercised its jurisdiction, with any material irregularity or illegality. 13. There is no force in this petition, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 14. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 19th April. 2002. The record of the trial Court shall be remitted back to the Court immediately. 13. There is no force in this petition, the same is dismissed. No order as to costs. 14. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 19th April. 2002. The record of the trial Court shall be remitted back to the Court immediately. CMP No.516 of 2001 15. No order, as the main petition has been dismissed, the application is disposed of. -