PICHAMMAL Vs. ARJUNA THEVAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision directed against the order dated 31. 10. 1986 passed in M. C. No. 36 of 1984, on the file of the Sub-Divisional judicial Magistrate, Valliyoor, dismissing the maintenance application filed by the petitioner.

(2.) THE petitioner Pichammal married the respondent on 6. 6. 1979. THEreafter, they lived together for nearly 2 1/4 years. THE respondent/husband in order to get a job left for Iraq , where he worked as Driver and was getting Rs. 4,000 per month as salary. During that period, the petitioner lived with her parents. THE respondent/husband was at Iraq for 2 1/2 years. During that period, the husband did not send any money to the wife/petitioner. After return from abroad to his native village, the respondent/husband took the petitioner/wife to his house and both of them lived together only for 15 days. THEn the respondent/husband began to demand 25 sovereigns of jewels as sreethana articles, since he was in good status, by getting a job abroad. When the petitioner/wife was not able to comply with the demand made by the respondent, she was scolded, beaten and treated cruelly. THEreafter, she was driven out. On 16. 5. 1984, while the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was subsisting, the respondent/husband married another women by name lakshmi, as second wife. In these circumstances, the petitioner/wife filed a petition for maintenance, under Sec. 125, Cr. P. C, claiming Rs. 400 per month.

(3.) MR. Subramanian, representing MR. P. Peppin Fernando, learned counsel for the respondent/husband, contended that the verdict given by the lower Court, dismissing the petition for maintenance is quite correct, that the reasonings given by the Court below, for arriving at a conclusion that the petitioner/ wife is not entitled to maintenance could not be said to be improper and that he contended that there is no infirmity in the findings given by the lower Court.