KUPPUSWAMY Vs. DEIVATHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the concurrent findings of facts by the two Courts below. Defendants 1 to 3 in the suit are the appellants in this second appeal. The plaintiff in the suit is the respondent. The plaintiff claims herself to be the wife of the first defendant. The second defendant is the father the third defendant is the mother of the first dafendant. The plaintiff laid the suit for separate maintenance, past and future, as well as for a charge over the plaint schedule properties. The defendants contested the suit stating that there was no valid marriage between the plaintiff and the first defendant and they also wanted to deny to the plaintiff the relief of maintenance past and future as well as the charge claimed by her. Requisite issues have been formulated in the first Court and findings have been rendered thereon and the first Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff for Rs. 1,000 towards past maintenance and for future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 75 per month and Rs. 100 per annum towards clothing and a charge over the plaint schedule properties was also created.

(2.) THE defendants appealed and there was also a cross-objections by the plaintiff coveting enhancement of the quantum of maintenance. THE lower appellate Court found no warrant for interference both in the appeal and as well as in the cross objection and both were dismissed the appeal with costs and the cross-objection without posts.

(3.) SECTION 5 (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Act, prior to the subsequent amendment, states that a marriage may be solemnised between two Hindus if the bridegroom has completed the age of eighteen years and the bride the age of fifteen years at the time of the marriage.