1. This is an appeal by unsuccessful plaintiff. She had instituted a suit for recovery of amount from defendant . her husband, which she had allegedly spent for marriage of their daughters. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as the plaintiff and the defendant.

2. The facts are as follows -

The plaintiff is the legally wedded wife of defendant. After the marriage, they lived together for a period of ten years. Thereafter, the defendant married with another woman and started residing separately. The plaintiff submits that she gave birth to five daughters out of the said wed-lock. It is contended by the plaintiff that since the time the defendant remarried, he never cared either for the plaintiff or the five daughters. The plaintiff was required to file application for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.Code. The court had awarded maintenance of Rs.125/- per month to the plaintiff and Rs.200/- per month each for two daughters - Alka and Vandana. It is contended by the plaintiff that the defendant is in service and also owns 12 acres of land. The plaintiff submits that the defendant, as a father, was bound to perform the marriages of all five daughters. It was not possible for the plaintiff to spend for the marriages since she had no source of income. The plaintiff made a request to the defendant to pay the amount for incurring the expenditure for marriages. The defendant assured that he will pay the amount and asked the plaintiff to incur the loan for the time being. On this assurance, the plaintiff submits that, she had borrowed Rs.70,000/- from one Sanjay Tiple for the performance of marriage of daughter Alka. She had also borrowed Rs.60,000/- from one Shankar Raghatate for the marriage of Ratna and further she had borrowed Rs.65000/- from one Chandrakant Chafale for the marriage of Vandana. The plaintiff has to repay this amount and she, therefore, seeks a decree for Rs.2,20,000/-.

3. The defendant filed a written statement and he does not dispute that the plaintiff is his legally wedded wife and that they have five daughters out of wed-lock. The defendant denies that he never cared for the plaintiff or the daughters. He denies that the plaintiff had incurred the loan as stated by her for the performance of marriage and that so much of amount was in fact spent in the marriage. It is contended that the suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintenable.

4. On these pleadings, the learned judge of the trial court framed issues and found that the plaintiff had not actually incurred any loan and she was not entitled to a decree as prayed by her.

5. I have hard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent.

6. The following points arise for my consideration and I am recording the findings on them.

1. Whether the plaintiff proves that for performance of the marriages of three daughters she had borrowed Rs.2,20,000/- from three persons as mentioned in the plaint ? ..... No.

2(a) Is the plaintiff alternatively entitled to reimbursement of reasonable expenses of marriage of three daughters from defendant . her husband ? ..... Yes.

2(b) If yes, Quantum ? ... Rs.75,000/-

- R E A S O N S -

7. A few undisputed facts may be stated thus -

The plaintiff and the defendant are still wife and husband respectively. Both the plaintiff and defendant are living separately since last more than 25 years. They have five daughters out of the said wed-lock. The plaintiff alone got married three daughters namely Alka, Ratna and Vandana. The plaintiff is claiming reimbursement of the amount spent for the marriage of the three daughters.

8. The plaintiff comes out with a case that she had performed marriages of these three daughters and for meeting the expenses she had to incur loan from three persons. The learned Civil Judge disbelieved the evidence of the plaintiff and her witnesses with regard to the borrowing of the money from them. The lea