PUNJI Vs. GOVIND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JACKSON , A.J.C. 1. The appellant in this case was defendant 1 in the trial Court. She is in possession of Survey No. 13 of mouza Jambhor in the Mehkar Taluk. This field had been given to her for maintenance by Gopal, the father of the plaintiff, by Ex. 1 D 1. The appellant has been found to have been the concubine of Gopal and the grant to have been made in consideration of her past and future cohabitation with Gopalrao. The grant has consequently been held to be Void because it was made for an immoral consideration and the plaintiff's claim to possession has been decreed.

(2.) IN appeal it is argued, in the first place, that the field is not ancestral property, that the plaintiff-respondent did not take any interest in it by birth and that he is not entitled to question the grant made by his father. The argument is based on Section 186 of Mulla's Hindu Law which deals with the character of property jointly acquired by members of a joint Hindu family, and, in particular, on this sentence: If it is the joint property of the joint acquirers, it would pass by survivorship but the male issue of the acquirers do not take any interest in it by birth.

(3.) IT is, however, argued that the appellant, as concubine of the deceased Gopal, is entitled to maintenance on the strength of the decision in Ningareddi v. Lakshmawa [1903] 26 Bom. 163, as she was in Gopal's keeping until his death. This is a claim made for the first time in this Court. I do not propose to consider it, as all the facts necessary to know in connexion with it have not been proved. That, as has been pointed out on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent, the connexion between the appellant and Gopal was an adulterous one, as the appellant's husband died on 17th June 1909, that is, a little more than a year after the grant for maintenance was made in favour of the appellant, is not sufficient ground for holding that she cannot get maintenance; but before holding that she can, I should require the nature and duration of her connexion with the deceased Gopal to be shown. The appellant must seek maintenance in a separate suit. I dismiss the appeal with costs.