AMMASI Vs. TMT AMARAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order granting maintenance passed in R.C. No. 21 of 1992 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Dindigul, on the averments filed by the wife against the order dismissing her claim in M.C. No. 8 of 1990 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Nilakottai, is challenged in this revision by the husband.

(2.) On behalf of the wife before the lower Court, four witnesses were examined and Exs. P. 1 to P. 7 were filed. On behalf of the husband/petitioner witnesses R.W. 1 the husband and R.Ws. 2 to 5 were examined. Exs. R. 1 to R. 8 were marked.

(3.) The case of the wife before the lower Court is that she was deserted by the husband after the child was born. Admittedly, the husband/petitioner is working in an army. To prove her case, the witnesses examined on behalf of the wife would speak about the marriage and birth of the child. But the case of the husband through his witnesses that the child was not born to him and the wife was living in adultery with one Govindaraju. On consideration of the entire evidence, oral and documentary, the lower Court came to the conclusion that the wife and the child were not entitled to maintenance, since the wife was living in adultery with Govindaraju.