BORAMMA Vs. DHARMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit out of which this second appeal arises commenced with an application for permission to sue in forma pauperis which was presented on July 14, 1958. The plaintiff was the wife who sought a decree for maintenance against her husband. There was an ex parte decree on April 8, 1959, and, in execution of that decree, the property of the husband was sold. It was at that stage that the husband made an application for getting the ex parte decree set aside, and it was set aside on payment of costs. The written statement was then produced on January 15, 1962 in which the husband contended that the wife had forfeited her right to maintenance by her unchastity.

(2.) The allegation of unchastity was made on the foundation of the birth of a female child to the plaintiff on November 8, 1960 during the pendency of the suit. The husband denied that the child was born to him while the wife asserted that he was her parent.

(3.) The Courts below pronounced against legitimacy and this was responsible for their conclusion that the wife was unchaste and so was not entitled to maintenance.