LAKSHMAYEE Vs. PONNA GOUNDAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting point of law arises in this case. The Appellant was married to the first Respondent sometime in the beginning of 1963 according to the Hindu Sastric rites. The second Respondent is the mother of the first Respondent. She had tiled the suit alleging that; since she refused to give her consent for the first Respondent marrying another girl as his second wife, she was beaten and driven out of the house on the 17th of October 1963. Though the panchayatdars requested the first Respondent not to ill -treat the Plaintiff. be was not heeding their advice and, their fore, she was entitled to live separately and claim maintenance under Sec. 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. She had claimed maintenance at Rs. 50 per mensem.

(2.) The first Respondent filed a written statement denying the allegation of cruelty and contended that she was not entitled to live separately or claim maintenance.

(3.) When the suit for maintenance filed by the Appellant was pending before the District Munsif, Salem, the first Respondent filed Original Petition No. 253 of 1964 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge of Salem under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, claiming restitution of conjugal rights. In this petition he had alleged that he never ill -treated his wife and that he had done nothing which would entitled his wife to live separately and desert him. The Appellant herein filed a counter denying these allegations and asserting that she was entitled to live separately and claim maintenance because of the ill treatment and cruelty of her husband. The maintenance suit came up for trial earlier than the petition for restitution of conjugal rights and by judgment and decree dated 31st July, 1967 the learned District Munsif held that the cruelty and desertion alleged by the Appellant were true and that she was entitled to live separately and claim maintenance. Having regard to the income from the properties and the requirements of the Appellant, the learned District Munsif fixed the maintenance at Rs. 30 per month and gave charge over the B Scheduled properties which were admittedly joint family properties.