K. PALANISAMI GOUNDER Vs. KANDAYEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The second appeal arises out of a decree passed by the lower appellate court confirming the decree of the trial court directing payment of maintenance to the plaintiff in the original suit at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month. Admittedly the appellant is the husband and the respondent is his wife. Their marriage took place somewhere around 1952 when the respondent/plaintiff was a minor. On attaining majority, the respondent/plaintiff did not initiate any proceeding for annulling the marriage. The appellant also did not take steps to have the marriage annulled on the ground that he was forced to marry the respondent against his will, even though such a stand was taken by him in his written statement for the first time. Alleging desertion and failure to provide for her maintenance, the respondent herein/plaintiff filed the above said suit for a decree directing the appellant/defendant to pay her maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month and also a charge over the properties of the appellant/defendant. Past maintenance was also claimed for three years prior to the filing of the suit.

(2.) The claim was resisted by the appellant herein/defendant on the following contentions:

(3.) After trial, on an appreciation of evidence, the learned trial judge held that the defence plea taken by the appellant herein/defendant could not be sustained and on the other hand, the respondent/plaintiff had proved her entitlement to claim maintenance from her husband, namely the appellant/defendant. Taking into account the need of the respondent/plaintiff, the family status and the financial position of the appellant/defendant and also the fact that the appellant/defendant admittedly contracted a second marriage, the learned trial judge held him liable to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month. Resultantly, the learned trial judge granted a decree as prayed for directing payment of pre-suit maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month for three years and pendente lite and future maintenance at the same rate and also creating a charge over the properties of the appellant/defendant.