SAMPOORNAM Vs. N SUNDARESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal revision case which has been filed against an order made by the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate of Madras in M. P. No. 745 of 1951.

(2.) The short facts are: The petitioner before us Sampaonam aged about 25 was married to the respondent Sundaresan in Madras in 1939. They lived for a year at No. 2 Hensman Road, T. Nagar, belonging to the father of the petitioner. Then this Sundaresan was employed as an Assistant in the Metallurgical Department at Tatanagar. The marriage was consummated only in June 1940 at Trichirapalli. Then the petitioner joined her husband at Tatanagar. They were visiting Madras as Madras was their first home to attend to business or ceremonies etc. In July 1950 the petitioner came to Madras along with her husband. They stayed for some time in Madras and the husband went back leaving the wife here for medical treatment. The husband has been then writing to her to come to Tatanagar after being restored to health and has been sending remittances to the wife at Madras, showing that the husband was keeping a second establishment at Madras where this petitioner was staying and receiving remittances. Then the husband and wife have fallen out and after protracted emotional correspondence the husband has now married a second wife and is living in Jamshedpur employed as the Chief Inspector, Metallurgical Department, Tata Iron and Steel Company. Hence this maintenance application in the Chief Presidency Magistrate's Court, Madras.

(3.) The respondent raised two objections, viz, that first of all the Chief presidency Magistrate was not entitled to entertain the application on the ground that he had not last resided with his wife at Madras, and secondly, that under Clause (4) of Section 488 Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner was not entitled to maintenance.