KESURAM Vs. SARASWATHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision by the husband is directed against the order of maintenance awarded to the wife and children.

(2.) The only ground that has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioner, in this revision is that the wife was not able to establish before the Court below, that there was a justifiable cause for her to live separately. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner cited two decisions in Tota v. Musammat Durgi, (1929) 30 Cri LJ 861, and Mitanjali Mohanty v. Fanendra Mohanty, 1992 Cri LJ 4046 (Orissa). In the former decision, the High Court of Lahore, has held that the wife who declines to go to her husband and live with him in his house without any sufficient reason is not entitled to maintenance. In the latter decision, A. Pasayat, J. of Orissa High Court, has held that the wife has failed to establish and substantiate the allegation of apprehension of danger to her life, and refusal to accept the offer of her husband for restoration of company has not been justified. But, in the very same decision, the following observation has been made :-"

(3.) Keeping these principles in mind, it has to be seen, whether the respondent/wife had any sufficient cause to refuse to live with her husband, the petitioner herein. With reference to the same, the finding of the Court below is as follows :-"