(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff to recover from the defendant future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100 per month and arrears of maintenance at the same rate for three years preceding the institution of the suit.
(2.) The plaintiff who is the wife was married to the defendant about the year 1920. They lived together for about 15 years. But they had no issue of the marriage. In the year 1930, the defendant married a second wife and from this marriage a daughter was born to the defendant. As the defendant did not have a son, he married a third time In the year 1940 and he got a son from this marriage. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had been acting entirely according to the wishes of the third wife and was not treating the plaintiff with the respect and courtesy that was due to her. Inspite of all this she continued to live with the defendant. But for some reason or other, the defendant brought the plaintiff back to her father's house. The plaintiff tried to persuade the defendant to take her back and accordingly she did go back to her husband of her own accord. Even on this occasion, when the defendant was living at Mahad, she did not receive the treatment which she deserved and therefore she was compelled to go back to her father's house. Thereafter she served a notice upon the defendant requiring him to provide her with separate residence and maintenance. As the defendant failed to do so, she filed this suit for claiming arrears of maintenance and also future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 100 per month.
(3.) The defendant in his written-statement denied the allegations of ill-treatment and stated that the plaintiff had left him and had gone to live with her father pf her own accord. Under the circumstances he contended that she was not entitled to separate maintenance. He added that he was prepared to allow the plaintiff to stay in a separate house and to give her what he considered a reasonable amount for her maintenance.