SIKHAIRAM Vs. GUNTHIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 20-6-1984, passed in Civil Appeal No. 64-A of 1984 by the Court of Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Shahdol, (arising out of the judgment and decree dated 17-6-1980, passed in Civil Suit No. 5-A of 1978, by the Court of Civil Judge (Class II), Baohari ). whereby the decree of the trial Court has been reversed and the plaintiff's suit is dismissed.

(2.) THE undisputed facts of the case are that the defendants-respondents obtained an ex parte order from the Court of Magistrate First Class, Baikunthpur (District Surguja), passed in Criminal Case No. 1 of 1973, dated 7-6-1973, whereby the plaintiff was directed to pay Rs. 100/per month as maintenance allowance to the two defendants, who were accepted to be the wife and son of the plaintiff. The revision filed against the said order (vide joint Criminal Revision Nos. 58 and 59 of 1978), was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol, on 30-5-1978.

(3.) THE plaintiff-appellant filed a suit No. 5-A of 1978 on 23-8-1978 in the Court of Civil Judge, Class II Baohari, with the assertion that the defendant No. 1 was not the married wife of the plaintiff and she never lived with him as his wife, nor he had any relations with her. It was also asserted that the defendant No. 2 is not his son. He was married to a lady by name Sundibai and with whom he is living. Out of the wedlock with Sundibai, eight children were born to them, out of whom three are still alive. The defendant No. 1, illegally and without any basis, obtained an order under Section 488 Cr. P. C. from the Magistrate. The defendant No. 1 was married to a person who is still alive. She is leading an adulterous life. As such, he sought a declaration that it be declared that defendant No. 1 is not his married wife and the defendant No. 2 is not his son, and, as such, they are not entitled for the maintenance allowance from him.