NESAMMA Vs. MANUVEL HENTRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is one Nesamma whose claim for maintenance under

(2.) The petitioner denied the aspersions against her morals made by the husband and she and three witnesses gave evidence in support of her husbands misbehaviour with Sarada and the consequent ill treatment and separation. Sarada was also examined as a witness for the petitioner. Though she denied having anything to do with the respondent, she did hot support respondents case that the petitioner was leading a loose life. The respondent gave evidence that on one occasion when he returned home after work at 9 in the night fee saw Evans in his wifes company in his room and they quarrelled over it. When he left for Trivandrum a few days after that she began to live in the house of Joyce the aunt of Evans with whom Evans was staying. He produced Ext. P-1 letter alleged to have been written to him by the petitioner. Two witnesses who were cited by him supported his case that one night in 1956 Evans was found in the company of the petitioner in her husbands room and the husband and wife had a quarrel over that. They added that few days after that the petitioner was found living in the house of Evanss aunt for some days and then she left the place to live with her parents.

(3.) The learned Magistrate after disbelieving the petitioner and her witnesses found that the petitioner lived with Evans till his death and was leading a loose life and on that ground he rejected her claim for maintenance.