SENAPATHI MUDALIAR Vs. DEIVANAI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is no doubt whatever that the order awarding separate maintenance to the respondent, the petitioner's first wife was correct and proper. The petitioner has married again and his offer to take the respondent back and treat her well cannot be taken to be sincere. Even it he takes her back, he will only make her an unpaid cook and maid for all work of himself and his second wife, an intolerable position and one to which no Court should drive a married woman.

(2.) THE next question is about the quantum of maintenance awarded. After carefully considering all the circumstances, I reduce it to Rs. 12-8-0 a month as the petitioner has to maintain another wife, married before the Anti-Polygamy Act and provide for children by her, out of his income of Rs. 40 a month, whereas children of his by the respondent are now highly improbable.