L E GODFREY Vs. MTPARBATI PALUNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Mr. L.B. Godfrey, an Excise Inspector of Sambalpur Sadar, is described by his learned advocate as "a European gentle, man of standing". He seeks to escape liability from a contract entered into with the respondent in the following circumstances: The respondent and the plaintiff were originally inhabitants of Bhadrak town and many years ago they came into contact and an attachment sprang up between them and the respondent who is an Indian woman of humble position became the mistress of the appellant. After some years of association, he entered into an agreement with the respondent to pay her Rs. 10 a month for her maintenance so long as she remained outcasted and unmarried. Notwithstanding the humble position in life of the respondent, she had most certainly by association with the appellant sacrificed such amenities as might be hers by association with him. There was nothing in the agreement with reference to future association and the contract was merely in respect of the past association, and Rs. 10 a month was to be paid to the woman so long as she de prived herself of such advantage attaching to membership of her community or so long as she should remain unmarried.

(2.) It is a fact that for some considerable time after the making of the contract the respondent and the appellant continued to be in association, but the agreement of which I had spoken had no reference to such continued relationship; it had reference merely to past relationship and to the future for the period that she should remain outcasted and remained unmarried. The time came when the appellant wished to marry another woman of his own status in life. He then refused to pay to the respondent the Rs. 10 a month which he had agreed to pay and discarded her altogether. When sued by her in respect of the arrears of the agreed Rs. 10 a month maintenance, he setup the defence, surprising as it may seem if we attribute to him the status claimed for him by his learned advocate, that the agreement to pay compensation was void as being against public policy; and he has attempted to argue firstly that the real object of the agreement was to promote the continued relationship with himself and that it was void because it was in effect an agreement for the continuance of their relationship. The fact that their relationship did continue after the agreement has no effect whatever on the validity of the agreement already made. If the law were otherwise, it would be possible for a man who had made an agreement for maintenance of a past mistress to destroy the effect of that agreement the next day by resuming co. (habitation with her for a week; the argument Was however not seriously pressed and has no merit whatever.

(3.) But it was further argued that an agreement to maintain a mistress after the relationship has passed is an agreement which is void as being of an immoral character. That argument has often been attempted and so far as I can examine the authorities, it has never been successful. The argument is based upon the confusion between an agreement to become a mistress which is doubtless void as being immoral, and an agreement to compensate a woman afterwards for an injury done to her and for the loss which she has sustained owing to an association, be it immoral or otherwise, with the plaintiff. A brief reference may be made to some of the cases which have come before the Courts.