JUDGMENT

Arun Kumar, J.-Leave granted.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. The appellant was married to respondent on 28-12-1972. As per the respondent s case, a girl child was born to the appellant on 28-4-1973/3-5-1973. Respondent divorced the appellant on 2-5-1977. The appellant filed a petition on 14-12-1977 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking maintenance for herself at the rate of Rs.150/- per month and for the daughter at the rate of Rs.125/- per month. In reply to the petition the respondent admitted the factum of the marriage, however, he set up a case that the fact that the appellant was already pregnant at the time of marriage, was concealed from him by the appellant, the marriage was therefore, invalid and void. As such he was not liable to pay maintenance. It was further submitted that the child was not born to the appellant through the respondent and, therefore, the respondent had no obligation to pay any maintenance qua the child. The learned Magistrate, 1st Class, Quilandy held that the marriage was valid and, therefore, he directed payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.75/- per month by the respondent to the appel