is no prayer in IA.No.3 from whom she is claiming interim maintenance. Further she has made as many as allegation against the father of the petitioner, but there are no allegations against the petitioner. Further on going through the affidavit of respondent in IA.No.3, it reveals that her husband/petitioner is absconding from 3 months. Further in her affidavit she has made allegations against the father of petitioner. But the respondent has not placed any documents to prove the income of the petitioner or his father. Knowingly she has not stated about the job and income of the petitioner. Apart from that the respondent has contended that she is not at all aware of the whereabouts of the respondent since 3 months. Moreover though the respondent has filed the present IA.No.3, but she has not stated specifically from whom she is claiming maintenance. But the respondent has just claimed maintenance, but she has not stated from whom she is claiming maintenance in the present case. But in her IA affidavit she has contended that petitioner is absconding from 3 months she is not aware of the whereabouts of the petitioner. However made some allegations against the father of respondent. The IA filed by the respondent in respect of seeking interim maintenance is very vague. Apart from that she has not mention the nature of the job of the petitioner and also his income. The respondent without mentioning the job and income of the petitioner, who is absconding since 3 months as per version of the petitioner, she is seeking interim maintenance vaguely. Apart from that the respondent also not placed any documents to prove the income of the respondent. Therefore in absence of mentioning of nature of job of the petitioner and his income and in absence of documentary evidence with regard to the income of the petitioner, the contention of the respondent that she needs interim maintenance pendantlite cannot be considered in absence of specific materials and positive evidence and also documentary evidence. Hence under the said circumstances as the respondent has failed to prove the income of the petitioner who is absconded since 3 months as per the version of herself, as this stage she has not made out any grounds for grant of interim maintenance. Hence, I answered point No.1 in the Negative.
