judgment as to the other parts, and the judgment shall be valid as of the date the interim alimony was decided. Now plaintiff submits this objection to the judgment issued by the Court of Appeal, claiming as follows: 1. The essence of her claim is that, the reduction of the alimony and house rent was contrary to the real situation, as defendant has a good income as he owns agricultural lands, partial inheritance in Al Hawari Schools in Medani, owns a transport car (Amgad), which daily income is SP350, owns other business and all these are confirmed by witnesses’ testimony. Moreover, the elder son is 18 years and a student at the Faculty of Engineering – Sudan University and he takes daily amount of SP40 for his breakfast and transport, the daughter who is 15 years old, who is a High School student needs a daily amount for her expenses, Mohammed who is 13 years old is also a high school student and the other three children go to elementary school and need pocket money daily. The amount of SP 500 is not enough to rent a single room, then why the Court of Appeal reduces the maintenance amount, finally she claims the increase of the amount to match with the accommodation requirements and to satisfy the basic needs of the children. We have given the judgment-debtor an opportunity to reply and the content of his pleading, submitted by the lawyer Mr. Hashim Abdul Bagi Mohammed Ahmed, can be summed up as follows: 1- The alimony decided by the Court was more than the necessary and does not match with the income of plaintiff, which was confirmed by inquiry and testimonies of witnesses. 2- For two years, plaintiff was trying to burden the judgment- debtor with an alimony that exceeds his ability, as he owns a transport car that he drives and does not have any additional income. 3- Appellant was awarded a house rent although she lives in the house of respondent’s mother, which intention was to assist her son, finally he