Decided on September 04,1952

Krishnappa Chettiar Appellant


Ramaswami, J. - (1.) THIS is a criminal revision case, which has been preferred against the judgment of the Additional First Class Magistrate, Deva -kottai, in M. C. No. 4 of 1951.
(2.) THE short facts are: Sivaksmi Achi, the respondent before MB, is the lawfully wedded wife of Krishnappa Chettiar. Krishnappa Chettiar and Sivakami Achi could not carry on their married life by 1948, This Chettiar, as is common in these parts, was keeping a concubine and wanted to take a second wife also. Therefore, the husband and wife entered into an arrangement, which has been marked as Ex. D. 1, and it is no body's case that this arrangement was not entered into or that the husband is going behind Ex. D. 1. The relevant passage in Ex. D. 1 is as follows: "As the party No. 1 among us is about to marry a second wife and as the party No. 2 above could not hereafter live amicably With party No. 1 and in view of the above factors, accounts were looked into with the help of mediators and it was settled that party No. 1 should pay and has accordingly paid party No. 2 a sum of Rs. 5500. As party No. 2 desires hereafter to live separately and has asked party No. 1 to make provision for her maintenance till her life -time and party No. 1 has agreed to the same and should accordingly pay party No, 2 a sum of Rs. 100 per annum on or before the 10th of the month (of) That every year till her lifetime in default party No. 2 could take steps to recover the same. Out of the sum of Rs. 5500, there is a balance of Rs. 4500 after reducing Rs. 1000 paid in cash for which sum the party No. 1 has executed a mortgage deed in favour of party No. 2. Till this entire principal and interest is paid, the party No. 1 shall be bound to pay without any plea of limitation the seethanam money of Rs. 1362 -4 -0 in respect of which a hundi has been executed to this effect both of us have agreed and executed this written deed." There was a receipt executed by Sivakami Achi, which has been marked as Ex. D. 2 and which can be considered to be the counter -part of Ex. D. 1. It runs as follows : "According to the agreement entered into between us. you have to pay me Rs. 100 as and for my maintenance till the 10th day of Thai this year. I have this day received from you cash for which I have executed this receipt."
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY the affairs of this Chettiar seem to have got into a fair amount of muddle and he seems to have lost his income from the Federated Malay States and other places and. what is more, his affairs in Ramanathapuram district itself seem to be not in flourishing circumstances and, therefore, the Chettiar says that he has taken that refuge which is open to persons of that description, viz., a religious life. The wife has now come forward with a petition under Section 488 Cr. P. C., asking for maintenance of Rs. 100 per month instead of Rs. 100 per annum, which has been secured for her in Ex. D. 1.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.