MANIKYA DEVI Vs. PABITRA SWAISINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNSUCCESSFUL plaintiff is the appellant. Her suit is for maintenance both arrear, pendente lite and future and for return of the ornaments and dowry which has been dismissed. Short case of the plaintiff is that she and defendant are Christians and they were married in the year 1974. As she protested against the illicit relationship of the defendant with another lady, defendant assaulted her and drove her away from his house. He has taken away the ornaments belonging to the plaintiff.

(2.) CASE of the defendant is that there is no marriage as alleged and the allegation that he drove her away is not correct. Taking of dowry or taking away the ornaments is also denied. Defendant asserted that plaintiff was a coolie under him. She is Hindu. She, however, remained with defendant for a long time before going away from his house. Suit is challenged to be not maintainable in view of an order under Section 125, Cr.P.C. in favour of plaintiff and in view of the fact that conditions of permanent alimony under Indian Divorce Act are not satisfied.

(3.) PLAINTIFF 's suit is a composite one for maintenance as well as for return of ornaments and dowry. Trial Court could not have dismissed the suit for return of ornaments and dowry. It ought to have answered the issue on the basis of evidence adduced. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial Court is vulnerable. However, evidence having been recorded, I considered all issues on merits.