KASHINATH SAHU Vs. DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur granting to respondent No. 1 maintenance at Rs. 65/- per month against her husband the appellant and creating a charge therefor on the plaint 'A' schedule properties. The appellant and respondent No. 1 were married on 11/3/1953. In the year 1955, she had an attack of filaria while she was residing in the house of her father-in-law at Berhampur. But no steps were taken for her treatment either by her father-in-law or mother-in-law and when her husband wanted to call a doctor, he was prevented from doing so by his mother. Thereafter, much against her will she was sent back to her father's house where she remained for a period of three years during which time nobody from her husband's house made any inquiries about her health nor did they provide any funds for her treatment. On the death of her father-in-law in the year 1958, although nobody from her husband's family came to take her from her father's house at Itamati in Puri District, she with her father voluntarily came to Berhampur to attend the father-in-law's obsequies. A few days thereafter, her mother-in-law did not want her to stay in the house and asked her to go back to her father's house, but on refusal, her husband against her wishes took her to her father's house and left her there. Sometime in Falgun, 1960, she was brought back to her husband's house and was subjected to harassment and physical torture from all the members of the family and was not allowed proper food and clothing and was forced to sleep in a room in the background of the house. Even the servants of the family misbehaved with her and insulted her at the instance of her mother-in-law. As the situation became unbearable she wrote a letter to her father who came and took her away from Berhampur. Thereafter she commenced the suit against her husband (Deft. 1), his brothers (Ds. 2 to 4) and his mother (D. 5), claiming maintenance at Rs. 100/- per month.

(2.) IN the written statement filed by the appellant (D. 1), he denied the plaintiff's allegation that she was ever neglected or ill-treated in her father-in-law's house and contended that there was no cause of action for the plaintiff to claim maintenance. He also disputed the quantum of maintenance stating that he has no share in the family business and that he is maintaining himself by working as a driver on a monthly salary of Rs. 90/-. The other defendants, in addition to denying the plaint allegations regarding cruelty and supporting the case of defendant No. 1 that he had no share in the family business, disputed the plaintiff's right in the event of her getting a decree for maintenance to charge the same on family properties.