RAMAN Vs. VASUMATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision arises from an order passed by the Additional First Class Magistrate, Tellicherry in M. C. No. 14 of 1970. The petitioner before me is the husband and the respondent, the wife. The wife filed M. C. No. 14 of 1970 under S.488 Cr. P. C., claiming maintenance from her husband. The learned

(2.) The petitioner and the respondent were married on 12th July, 1967 according to the customary rights, at the Suryanarayana Temple, Kadirur. After the marriage, they stayed together for some time at Kadirur. Thereafter, the petitioner took the respondent to Bangalore where he is running a bakery. On 18th May, 1968 the petitioner brought back the respondent to Kadirur and left her at her house and the petitioner returned to Bangalore. In spite of several letters sent to the petitioner claiming maintenance, no maintenance was given to her. As the petitioner neglected to maintain the respondent, she filed M. C. 14 of 1970 claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200/- per mensem.

(3.) The husband, the petitioner before me, while admitting the marriage denied that he had ever taken the wife back from Bangalore to her house at Kadirur. According to him, she went from Bangalore along with her brother Vijayan without his consent. He also stated that he tried to settle the dispute between them through mediators but she was not amenable. According to him, the wife refused to live with his mother and when he asked her to join him as a dutiful wife at Bangalore, she refused. Therefore, he is not bound in law to maintain the respondent. He also contended that the amount claimed is excessive.