(1.) THIS is defendant's second appeal directed against the judgment and decree dated the 22nd December, 1950 passed by the Civil Judge, Bharatpur, in a suit for maintenance.
(2.) IT is common ground that on account of the union between appllant Sukha and respondent Mst. Ninni a female child named Jamila was born some time in 1954. Mst. Ninni made an application under sec. 488 Cr. P. C. against Sukha for the maintenance of Jamila. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bayana by his order dated the 15th June, 1955 ordered Sukha to pay a sum of Rs 10/- per month with effect from the 11th May, 1954 up to the end of June, 1955 and further directed that he should in future pay on the first of every month the said sum of Rs. 10/- and remit the same by money order to Mst. Ninni. Against this order Sukha preferred an application for revision before the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur but later withdrew the application. The plaintiff's case is that before Sukha withdrew his revision application pending in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur on 17. 9. 1955 an agreement was reached between Mst. Ninni and Sukha that the latter shall pay a sum of Rs. 8/-per month instead of Rs. 10/- for the maintenance of the illegitimate child Jamila until such time she was married. Sukha did not pay the amount he had agreed upon to pay as per agreement (Ex. 1) for the maintenance of the child Jamila. Thereupon Mst. Ninni instituted a suit in 1958 for the recovery of the maintenance allowance in accordance with the agreement (Ex. 1) against Sukha. He resisted the suit by denying the execution of the agreement. Both the courts found against him and held that the agreement was duly executed by Sukha and it was pursuant to the agreement (Ex. 1) that Sukha had not pressed his application for revision before the Sessions Judge, Bharatpur. They held that Sukha was liable to maintain this illegitimate child and pay Rs. 8/- per month to Mst. Ninni. Dissatisfied by the judgment of the Civil Judge, Bharatpur, Sukha has come up in second appeal.