LEELAVATHY Vs. SUNDAR ATHMASEELAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of the lower court refusing to award interim maintenance claimed by the appellant at the rate of Rs. 200 per month.

(2.) THE appellant and the respondent were married on 11-7-1973. The respondent herein filed a suit O. S. No. 1 of 1975 seeking divorce under S. 10 of the Indian Divorce Act 1869, on 9-4-1975, on the ground that the appellant had committed adultery with the second defendant in the suit. The appellant resisted the said suit on the ground that she had not committed adultery with the second defendant or any one else, but on the other hand, the plaintiff had driven her out and deserted her 2 or 3 months after the marriage. After filing the written filed a petition under S. 36 of the Indian Divorce Act, for directing the plaintiff husband to pay her alimony at Rs. 200 per month and also the cost of defence in the suit.

(3.) IN the said petition she has alleged that as she has been deserted by her husband (plaintiff), that she is living with her elder brother in Japan, that she owns no property, and that, therefore, she has to be paid alimony to maintain herself during the pendency of the suit for divorce. She claimed that the respondent was working as a supervisor in Madurai Mills Ltd. , and that having regard to his salary, he may be directed to pay a sum of Rs. 200 per month towards interim maintenance and Rs. 500 towards costs of the litigation. The respondent herein resisted the said petition contending that the appellant is not entitled to claim any interim maintenance, that she is earning Rs. 2,000 per month, as a teacher in Japan, that she has got other assets which can yield sufficient income, and that therefore, she is not entitled to be paid any interim maintenance.