GLADSTONE Vs. GEETHA GLADASTONE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant in O.S. 308 of 1995 on the file of the Family Court,Thiruvananthapuram filed this appeal challenging the judgment passed by the Court below awarding an amount of Rs. 1,500/- to the first plaintiff and Rs. 2,756/- to minor second plaintiff per mensem as maintenance with effect from 14.8.1993.

(2.) The appellant married the first respondent on 12.8.1982 as per the customary rites. The second respondent is their daughter. At the time of marriage, the appellant was practicing as Physician in a private nursing home. In the year 1986 he was appointed as Assistant Surgeon, E.S.I. Hospital, Chavara, Puthenthura. From the year 1989 onwards, the plaintiffs and defendant started residing at their house at Kumarapuram near Medical College.The appellant got admission for Master of Surgery in the Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram in 1992. According to the respondents, on 14.8.1993, the appellant defendant deserted them and started residing in the hostel attached to the Medical College and thereafter he is not maintaining them. It is also alleged that subsequently the appellant developed illicit intimacy with a staff nurse, by name "chandrika" working in the Medical College and is now residing with her. It is admitted that the appellant deposited an amount of Rs. 2,34,000/- in the joint names of the appellant and first respondent authorizing the first respondent to withdraw the monthly interest amounting to Rs. 2,600/-. According to the first respondent, she was forced to withdraw the amount of Rs. 2,34,000/- deposited in the joint names of the appellant and first respondent to re-pay the debts due from the appellant to her brother and sister. It is averred that the appellant is getting more than Rs. 40,000/- per mensem from different sources. The first respondent claimed Rs. 3,000/- as monthly maintenance for herself and Rs. 6,750/- to the minor second respondent. It is also alleged that since the appellant deserted the respondents on 14.8.1993, he is liable to pay maintenance from that date onwards. So, they had claimed an amount of Rs. 2,24,250/- as past maintenance and Rs. 3,000/- to the first respondent and Rs. 6,750/- to the second respondent as future maintenance.

(3.) The appellant contended that the suit is not maintainable. The marriage and status of the respondents are admitted. It is admitted that the appellant and the first respondent lived together till 12.1.1992. It was also contended that on 1.12.1992 the 1st respondent prevented the appellant from entering to the house. According to the appellant, the 1st respondent treated him with cruelty and drove him out of the matrimonial home. It was contended that because of the insistence of the first respondent the appellant sold away all his properties and deposited an amount of Rs. 2,34,000/- in National Service Scheme at Medical College Post Office in the joint account of both the appellant and first respondent and the first respondent was drawing an amount of Rs. 2,600/- per mensem as interest. It was contended that after the filing of the suit the first respondent had withdrawn the amount and she is in possession of the same. It was also contended that the appellant had deposited another sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- in the Bank in the name of the first respondent on 23.12.1992 and that amount was also withdrawn by the first respondent. It was contended that when the appellant got admission for the Post Graduate Course he shifted the residence to the hostel for the convenience of study. It was contended that during that time he used to visit the respondents. The averment that he is living with Chandrika is denied. The contention that he borrowed amounts from the brother and sister of the first respondent was denied. It was contended that the first respondent is getting income from various sources. The averment that he is getting more than Rs. 40,000/- per mensem is denied. The quantum of maintenance claimed is also denied.