MASNA BHAGYA LAXMI Vs. MASNA VEERA BHADRUDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri T, Ramuluthe Counsel representing the Revision, Petitioner, and Sri Lakshmi Narasimhachari the Counsel representing the Respondent.

(2.) The Revision Petitioner Smt. M. Bhagya Lakshmi as plaintiff instituted a suit O.S. No. 57 of 2002 on the file of Junior Civil Judge Gajwel for maintenance and also moved an application I.A.No. 48 of 2003 under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying the Court to pay her a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) per month from the date of petition towards interim maintenance, from the respondent- husband in the suit, her husband, M. Veera Bhadrudu.

(3.) The specific case of the Revision Petitioner is that she is legally wedded wife of the Respondent-husband whose marriage having been celebrated on 04-12-1997 at Gajwel as per the Hindu rites and Custom prevailing in their community. No doubt, several other averments relating to the presenting of cash, gold, household articles and clothes during the time of marriage also had been stated. It was also stated that after one year of the marriage, the respondent had developed illicit intimacy with one Sandhya who was deserted by her husband and he has kept the said Sandhya as concubine. Several other factual aspects also had been narrated in detail in the affidavit filed in support of the application before the learned Junior Civil Judge, at Gajwel. Respondent- husband filed a counter in detail denying almost all the allegations and taking a specific stand that he is working in N.R.S.A. at Bala Nagar and while he was working in the said company he had acquainted himself with one Sandhya and had developed love and thereafter without the consent of their parents and elders he married Sandhya on 03-01-1996 as per Hindu Custom Rites and Traditions at Yadagirigutta Kalyana Mandapam. They were living together as husband and wife and that their marriage was inter-caste marriage against the wishes of his parents and community elders. Thus, in substance the stand taken by the respondent-husband is that Sandhya is his first wife and hence the marriage with the petitioner is not a valid marriage in the eye of law and hence, she is not entitled to any relief whatsoever in the suit much less in the application claiming for interim maintenance.