S YELLAMMA Vs. S ANJANEYUIU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This regular appeal is by the plaintiffs, against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.168 of 1981, dt. 13-10-1986 on the file of the Court of Subordinate judge, Madanapalle. The first plaintiff is wife and plaintiffs 2 and 3 are daughters of first defendant. The suit was filed for maintenance at the rate of Rs.300.00 per month and for marriage expenses for plaintiffs 2 and 3 at the rate of Rs.30,000.00 each. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the first defendant is not guilty of desertion or abandonment of first plaintiff, and also on the ground that the first plaintiff was not entitled to live separately. The pleadings in brief may be noticed by referring to the parties as they are arrayed in the suit.

(2.) The first plaintiff and the first defendant lived together along with their children till about two months prior to the date of filing of the suit. The first defendant joined hands with second defendant, who poisoned the mind of former carrying tales against the first plaintiff. This resulted in erosion of love and affection towards the plaintiffs. For two months the first defendant did not pay any amount to the plaintiffs to maintain even the minor children and neglected the family. The parents of the first plaintiff came to Madanapalle and tried to mend the conduct of the first defendant in vain. Elders were also unsuccessfully sent to talk to first defendant so that plaintiffs can join him. On 14-10-1981 the first defendant with the support of the second defendant sent a rowdy person by name, Srinivasulu Naidu, son of Gopalu of B.K. Palle, to the house of first plaintiff where she has been residing, to see that she is dishonoured and defamed. The first defendant did not come to his house to see the children. The second defendant plunged the first defendant into habit of drinking and playing cards and moving in bad company of rowdy persons. The second defendant did all this to knock away the properties of the first defendant over which the plaintiffs got right for maintenance. The plaintiffs came to know that the second defendant tried to take some nominal and fraudulent documents from the first defendant with a view to defeat and defraud the maintenance right of plaintiffs. The first plaintiff issued Lawyer's notice dt. 15-10-1981 calling upon defendants not to indulge in such activities. This was replied by the first defendant on 28-10-1981 with false allegations. The first defendant has been working as 'photo frame worker' in glasses and being a best artist in writing pictures, he is earning Rs. 2,000.00 per month though he is a stone deaf person. The plaint A schedule property house is worth Rs. l,00,000/-. He is also getting monthly rent of Rs.100.00 for his house situated in Society Colony. The plaintiffs required an amount of Rs. 300.00 for clothing, food and educational expenses and an amount of Rs. 30,000/- towards marriage expenses for each of the plaintiffs 2 and 3. The first defendant made unfounded allegations of adultery against the first plaintiff. Hence, the first defendant is bound to pay the maintenance as claimed, and the plaint-A schedule house is liable to be proceeded against for realisation of maintenance amount.

(3.) The first defendant filed written statement opposing the suit claim. It is denied that till about two months prior to filing of the suit first plaintiff has been living with him. It is stated that the first plaintiff deserted him earlier in 1973, that her parents brought her to his house, that she is spending his money lavishly and improperly, and that there were talks among people that she is moving freely with one Kavvuru Ramamurthy of Basinikonda developing illicit intimacy. One day he found the first plaintiff and the said Ramamurthy in the house and when he chastised them they caught hold of him and beat him severely. Both of them left the plaintiffs 2 and 3 with him saying that first plaintiff would not come back. He left the children with his maternal uncle at Chittoor, but the first plaintiff took the children from there with false representations and the first plaintiff never came to his house. Apprehending that she may resort to unlawful acts, he caused a notice issued to her to desist from any such move. After receipt of the notice, the first plaintiff filed Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.53 of 1980 in the Court of Additional Magistrate of First Class, for maintenance for herself and for plaintiffs 2 and 3 under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Subsequently, as she did not press the petition, it was dismissed on 12-6-1980. It is stated that he got deafness from his childhood and is a photo frame worker and earning only Rs.150.00 to 200.00 per month and he is not best artist of writing pictures. He is not guilty of neglect or desertion of first plaintiff. For requirements of his business and to discharge his debts incurred for construction of the house and to complete the construction, he entered into an agreement of sale with second defendant in respect of the plaint-A schedule property, and he received an advance of Rs.4,000.00 and the first item of plaint-A schedule property is only worth Rs. 40,000.00. He is willing to take the custody of plaintiffs and provide for their needs and he is prepared to arrange for marriage of plaintiffs 2 and 3.