KALLOO Vs. MTIMAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit by his wife for dissolution of marriage on the ground that the defendant had falsely charged her, the plaintiff, with adultery. The defendant in his written statement admitted having made such an accusation and also that it was false, but he, at the same time, expressed regret for his conduct and retracted the charge.

(2.) One of the issues before the Courts below was whether, after the above retraction by the defendant-husband, the plaintiff wife was still entitled to a decree for dissolution of her marriage. The trial Court held that she was not, but the lower appellate Court found that she was so entitled. The present appeal is against the latter decree.

(3.) The ground on which the trial Court held the retraction made by the defendant-appellant to have nullified the legal effect of the charge of adultery was that a Mohamedan husband being given a locus panitennia either to affirm or deny the imputation alleged to have been made by him had also the liberty in the former case of retracting the same at any time before the evidence in the suit for dissolution of the marriage was closed. The lower appellate Court, however, proceeded to decide the case on a different ground altogether. It held that after the passing of Act VIII