GNANASABESAN Vs. REVATHI ALIAS KAUSALYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL filed against the Judgment and decree, dated 27.08.1999 made in O.S.No.153 of 1998 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai.This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree passed by the lower court, namely, Principal Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai in O.S.No.153/1998, dated 27.08.1999 preferred by the aggrieved defendant.

(2.) THE defendant is the appellant. THE suit was filed by the wife and the minor child seeking for past maintenance at Rs.1,000/- per month for the 1st plaintiff and at Rs.500/- per month for the 2nd plaintiff for three years and also to pay the future maintenance from the date of the plaint at the same rate to the plaintiffs and also to pay a sum of Rs.3 Lakhs towards the marriage expenses of the minor 2nd plaintiff and for recovery of 'B' schedule jewels from the custody of the defendant and for costs.

(3.) THE appellant herein is the defendant before the lower court. THE first plaintiff is the wife of the defendant and the 2nd plaintiff is the minor daughter born to the 1st plaintiff and the defendant. THE lower court had after considering the evidence adduced on either side come to a conclusion of decreeing the suit for past maintenance at Rs.500/- per month in favour of the 1st plaintiff and Rs.300/- per month in favour of the 2nd plaintiff for three years immediately before the suit towards past maintenance and directed the defendant to pay the future maintenance at the same rate and allowed a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards marriage expenditure of the minor 2nd plaintiff and further directed the defendant to deposit the same into court within three months time and also allowed costs. THE claim for return of the jewels as detailed in 'B'schedule property was negatived by the lower court. While coming to the conclusion, the lower court had framed six issues as follows:1. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the return of the properties described in 'B' schedule?. 2. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to claim maintenance from the defendant?. 3. If so, what is the quantum of maintenance, the plaintiffs are entitled?. 4. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to past maintenance form the defendant?. 5. Whether the defendant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.3 Lakhs towards marriage expenses of the minor 2nd plaintiff?.