Suryanarayana Rao, J.
1. This is a Muslim husband's revision petition against an order of maintenance passed by the lower Court awarding O, S. Rs. 50 to his wife & two daughters aged 8 & 11.
2. In his counter, the husband stated that ha had divorced his wife in 1854 Fasli. The Court, however, hold that the alleged divorce was not proved. In revision, I am not prepared to interfere with this finding of fact.
3. Learned Advocate for the respondents argues in the alternative, as a question of law, that the statement by the husband in his written statement that he had divorced his wife will operate as divorce since it is an expression of his intention to divorce his wife. He relies on a Division Bench ruling of this High Court in Mohammed Hussain v. Rasul Bi, 14 Deccan L. R. 37 wherein it was held that a statement of the husband as having given tallak, made before the Court operates as divorce. In Abdul Azeez v. Kabira Bi, 32 Deccan L. R. 192, it was held that an endorsement by the husband on a notice issued by the Court in maintenance proceedings, that he had divorced his wife operated as a declaration of divorce. This is a Single Bench judgment dated 18th Farwardi 1351 Fasli. Learned Advocate for the respondents refers me to another Single Bench ruling of the same learned Judge who decided the last-mentioned case. That is the ruling in Hussain Begam v.MirzaTurab Ali Khan 31Deccan L.R.7. The data of this judgment is 13th Mehir 1349 Fasli and it was held that, where the wife denied that talak was granted, it had to be proved like any other fact. That is so, I am unable to see how this earlier ruling conflicts with the later ruling of the same learned Judge.
4. The question is : What is the legal effect of the husband stating in his written statement that he had already divorced his wife, if the Court should come to the conclusion that the divorce pleaded was not proved; in other words, whether the statement itself could operate as a divorce as & from the date the written statement was filed in Court. The first two mentioned cases are directly in point and are authority for the proposition that such a statement in the written statement or an endorsement on summons or notice itself operates as an expression of divorce by the husband & operates as from that moment. In this view, I hold respondent 1 was divorced on 4th shehswar l358 Fasli which is the date on which the written statement; of the husband was filed in Court,
5. In law, a divorced woman is entitled to maintenance during the period of iddat which is four months and ten days from the date of divorce.
6. In the result, the respondents -will be entitled to recover maintenance from the revision petitioner at the rate of O. S. Rs. 30 per mensem from 3rd Khurdad 1358 Fasli till 14th Dai 1359 Fasli. As from 15th Dai 1359 Fasli, respondent 1 is not entitled to any maintenance! and only respondents 2 & 3 will be entitled to it, I consider a sum of O. S. Rs. 30 per mensem as reasonable, having regard to the present day standard of living. My own impression is that it is probably insufficient but considering the present circumstances of the revision-petitioner, I am rot able to grant anything more. The amount of maintenance at O. S. Rs. 50 per mensem will be recoverable by respondent 1 for and on behelf of all the respondents & the amount of maintenance at O. S. Rs. 30 per mensem will also be recoverable by respondent 1 as mother & guardian of respondents 2 & 3.
7. Revision petition is partly allowed with the modifications indicated above.