( 1 ) THE question referred to the Full Bench is whether Clause (4) of Section 2, Hindu Womens Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance Act (19 of 1946) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is applicable only if the husband contracts a marriage after the Act or whether the words marries again are merely descriptive of the position of the husband as a twice married man at the date when the proceedings are taken under the Act, and they do not exclude from their operation the husband, who has taken a second wife before the Act. This point arises in all these appeals, some preferred by the wives and others by the husbands. For the sake of convenience, we will refer to the husbands as appellants and the wives as respondents.

( 2 ) THE answer to this question turns upon the interpreation of Clause (4) of Section 2 of the Act. That section is in these words;"2. Notwithstanding any custom or law to the contrary, a Hindu married woman shall be entitled to separate residence and maintenance from her husband on one or more of the following grounds, namely: 1. If he is suffering from any loathsome disease not contracted from her, 2. If he is guilty of such cruelty towards her as