MUTHUKUMARASAMY Vs. MOHANAVALLI, MINOR LAKSHMI PRABHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein filed HMOP No.19 of 2001 on the file of the Sub Court, Pollachi, as against his wife/R1 herein, with a prayer for dissolution of marriage and, during the pendency of the said petition, as the appellant failed to take care of R1 and the only minor daughter/R2 herein, they filed an application before the said Court in I.A. No.31 of 2001, seeking interim alimony till the disposal of the HMOP. Accepting their case that they have no income to maintain themselves and to get food, clothing, shelter, etc., the Sub Court, Pollachi, directed the husband to pay interim alimony at the rate of Rs.500/- p.m. each to the wife and the minor daughter. However, the said order was not complied with. Consequently, the wife filed a suit against the husband in O.S. No.119 of 2003 on the file of the District Munsif, Pollachi, with a prayer to order grant of maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,200/- each to herself till her life-time and to her daughter till she gets married, by stating that, subsequent to their marriage on 01.12.1995, out of the wed-lock, on 16.05.1998, the 2nd plaintiff-female child was born and since the birth of a female baby was disliked by the husband's family, the first plaintiff was not allowed to live in the matrimonial home and, after being sent out from the matrimonial home in the midst of 1998 and deserted by the husband, the first plaintiff with her female child is living in her parents' house. While seeking maintenance, the plaintiffs also prayed the trial court to create charge over the properties of the defendant/husband. The husband filed a written statement, stating that he did not heed to the persistent demand of the wife to get his share in the properties from the parents and felt aggrieved thereby, she was frequently abusing him and it was she who actually deserted the husband and left the matrimonial home with the child.

(2.) The learned District Munsif, after considering the case by examining the oral and documentary evidence, passed the judgment on 17.12.2003 by holding that the plaintiffs/wife and minor daughter, are entitled for a monthly maintenance of Rs.800/- and Rs.1,200/- respectively, and simultaneously, charge was created over the properties of the husband/defendant in case of default in payment. The appeal preferred by the defendant before the Sub Court, Pollachi, in A.S. No.3 of 2004, came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 23.08.2004. Hence, the present appeal by the husband.

(3.) This Court, while admitting the Second Appeal, framed the following substantial questions of law for consideration:-