NOOR ALAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bettiah, in Maintenance Case No. 15/1994 (trial No. 280/1999). The order was passed on 18.6.1999. By the aforesaid order Salma Khatoon, daughter of Noor Fatma, was allowed maintenance amount of Rs. 300/- per month to be paid by the revisionist before this Court, who was husband of Fatma Khatoon.

(2.) It was submitted by the revisionist's lawyer that although he had admitted marriage with Noor Fatma, his case was that he had divorced his wife Noor Fatma in the year 1983 and she was banished from his house and since then she was living with her brother. Salma Khatoon was not born out of the wedlock between the revisionist and Noor Fatma. So, Salma Khatoon was not entitled to claim any maintenance amount. It was further submitted that the evidence on record did not support that Salma Khatoon was the daughter of the revisionist from his first wife Noor Fatma.

(3.) I find that both the parties had adduced evidence in the Trial Court. Noor Fatma was examined as A.W. 2 It is her evidence which is the most relevant for considering whether Salma Khatoon is her daughter born on account of her wed-lock with the revisionist, Md. Noor Alam. I find that in chief she said that she was not living with her husband Md. Noor Alam for the last two years short of four months (Paune do), when she was banished from her husband's house after assault. Other witnesses examined on her behalf also gave almost the same period of her banishment from her husband's house. But in cross-examination A.W. 2, the applicant Noor Fatma made a starting and self-defeating disclosure at paragraph 7, where she said that in the year 1983 she had quarrelled with Noor Alam and in this very year she was turned out by her husband. Since then she has been living with her brother Islam. She was also divorced at the time of her desertion. At paragraph 8 she further made another significant statement that after her desertion by her husband she had no connection with him. Salma Khatoon was examined as A.W. 1. She was examined on 7th September, 1995, and she had given her age as 11 years. So, if her year of birth is calculated from 7.9.1995 it would go back to 7.9.1984. Noor Alam was examined as O.P.W. 7 and he said that he had divorced his wife Noor Fatma in the month of April, 1983 itself. He further said that after divorce he had no connection with Noor Fatma. She went away from his house after taking Dan Mehar, etc. So, from the total evidence on record, it was obvious that the mother of Salma Khatoon had no connection with her husband Md. Noor Alam after her divorce in the year 1983 in the month of April. From the date of birth of Salma Khatoon (7.9.1984) it cannot be presumed that Fatima had conceived during her cohabitation with Md. Noor Alam when she was at her husband's house. From the aforesaid evidence, it is apparent that Salma Khatoon was not the daughter of Md. Noor Alam, who is the revisionist before this Court. In such a circumstance, it is not understandable how Salma Khatoon shall be entitled to receive any maintenance allowance from the revisionist.