RAGHAVAN Vs. SATHYABHAMA JAYAKUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question of law, raised in the suit and the first and second appeals, which gave rise to the reference of the matter to the Full Bench, is whether for the purpose of S.18 (2) (a) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, (78 of 1956), (hereinafter referred to as the Maintenance Act.) animus is required to be established to prove desertion.

(2.) The brief facts leading to this second appeal could be stated as follows:- The first plaintiff Sathyabhama Jayakumari, on behalf of herself and her minor child, 2nd plaintiff, instituted a suit claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100/- and Rs. 50/-per month respectively for herself and the 2nd plaintiff, from the defendant, Raghavan Radhakrishnan, who had married her on 12-11-1973. The 2nd plaintiff was born in that wedlock on 11-8-1974. The first plaintiff was residing with the defendant till 23-3-1974 on which date she left for her parents' home for confinement. The Trial Court found that the defendant had abandoned the plaintiffs without reasonable cause, and decreed the suit as prayed for.

(3.) The main ground taken in the first appeal was that the Trial Court was in error in finding that the defendant had deserted his wife, and the offer by him to maintain the plaintiffs was not bona fide. The first appellate Court found that there was no ground to interfere with the decree passed by the Trial Court, and dismissed the appeal. Hence this second appeal.