KRISHNAN THAMPI Vs. PONNAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Additional District Munsiff of Trivandrum in N.S. 4 of 1124 awarding compensation of Rs. 500/- to the counter petitioner on the dissolution of her marriage with the petitioner. The petitioner prayed for the dissolution of the marriage on the ground that the counter petitioner refused to live with him and that it amounted to legal cruelty. The counter petitioner while denying the allegations in the petition agreed to the dissolution of the marriage and claimed compensation. The court below declared the marriage dissolved and awarded Rs. 500/- as compensation to the counter petitioner. The appeal is directed against the order awarding compensation.

(2.) The learned Advocate for the appellant contends that even though the counter petitioner while denying the allegations in his petition has agreed to the dissolution of the marriage the circumstances that led to the dissolution of the marriage are matters which ought to have been taken into consideration by the court in decreeing compensation in favour of the wife. According to him the court ought to have enquired into the truth of the allegation in his petition that his wife had wilfully deserted him and ought to have brought its finding on that question also, to bear on its decision regarding the compensation to be decreed in her favour.

(3.) It is argued that the expression as would be proper under the circumstances before the words having regard to the position, means and circumstances of the parties sub-s. (3)(a) would justify the court in taking into consideration the truth or otherwise of the allegations in the petition in determining the compensation that may be decreed in favour of the wife. We are unable to agree with this contention. S.7(2)(a) clearly provides that if the wife while denying the allegations contained in the petition agrees to the dissolution, the court shall without going into the grounds alleged declare in writing the marriage dissolved and S.7(3)(a) enjoins that at the time of passing that order the court shall except where the respondent lives in adultery or has changed her religion award to the wife such compensation not exceeding Rs. 5000/- or such monthly allowance till her remarriage as would be proper under the circumstances having regard to the position, means and circumstance of the parties. Therefore even if the ground alleged in the petition, viz., wilful desertion, is established, and dissolution of marriage is granted on that ground, still, the wife will be entitled to compensation as provided for under the Act. That being the case, we do not think that the expression as would be proper under the circumstances in S.7(3)(a) is wide enough to justify an enquiry in the truth of the allegations in the petition for the purpose of awarding compensation except in cases where adultery or change of religion of the respondent is pleaded. Reading S.7, as a whole, we do not think that it was the intention of the Legislature that except where the respondent lives in adultery or has changed her religion the grounds mentioned in the petition of the husband justifying dissolution of marriage should be taken into consideration in deciding the question of the compensation to the wife. The court below was therefore right in having confined itself to the consideration of the position, means and circumstances of the parties in determining the compensation to be awarded to the wife.