D S SESHADRI Vs. JAYALAKSHMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS civil revision petition arises out of an order passed by the Principal Judge, city Civil Court, Madras, in a matrimonial cause granting permanent alimony to the respondent, the wife of the petitioner under the provisions of Section 25 of the hindu Marriage Act (Act 25 of 1955 ). The facts which give rise to this civil revision petition are these: the respondent was married to the petitioner on 11-1-1951. Soon thereafter the couple set up their home at Madras where the husband was employed as a clerk in the Revenue Department of the Government of Madras, on a modest salary of about Rs. 120 per month. The marriage unfortunately was not a success and there were misunderstandings between the couple even from the very beginning. Within a month after they set up their home, the wife left her husband for her father's house at Conjeevaram taking with her all her belongings, Attempts by husband to bring her back did not succeed, but it is stated that the respondent came to Madras and stayed with her husband for about 15 days in august 1956 in connection with the obsequial ceremonies of the petitioner's father. But even then she is said to have stayed in her husband's house only during daytime. On 30-9-1959 after having waited for nearly 8 years the petitioner filed a petition under Section 10 of the hindu Marriage Act for judicial separation. The application was resisted by the respondent on the ground that there had been no desertion on her part as she was prevented from living with her husband by reason of the bad treatment accorded to her in his house by his mother and sister. That defence was found to be false. By his order dated 21-3-1960 the learned City Civil Judge found that the respondent had deserted the petitioner, without reasonable cause for a continuous period of more than two years preceding the prestion of the petition and passed a decree for judicial separation. During the pendency of the petition for judicial separation the respondent was paid under an order of Court a sum of Rs. 20 per month towards her maintenance. On 24-1960 the respondent filed an application under Section 25 of the Act for the grant of permanent alimony at the rate of Rs. 30 per month. The lower Court accepted her claim and passed an order as prayed for. The propriety of this order is the subject matter of this civil revision petition.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been taken to the maintainability of the civil revision petition under Section 115 of the C. P. C. the contention being that as an appeal lies against an order under Section 25 of the Act, this Court would have no jurisdiction to interfere in revision. Before dealing with this contention it is necessary to refer to Section 28, which confers a right of appeal to an aggrieved party against decrees and orders made under the Act. The section states-

(3.) THIS section is couched in words similar to these contained in Section 39 of the special Marriage Act, and Section 55 of the Indian Divorce Act. The wording of the section is not very happy; for example, it is not clear from its terms whether an appeal lies against all decrees and orders made in any proceeding under the Act or whether such an appeal will lie only in respect of such decrees and orders for which appeal is provided under some other Jaw. Secondly, even if the former views were correct it is a matter of doubt, whether an appeal would lie against every order passed in the course of proceedings under the Act or only against final orders therein.