S. H. S. Abidi, J.

1. This revision application has been filed by the husband, md. Arif against the order of the learned S. D. J. M. , Bagaha, granting the maintenance of Rs.200 to his wife Bibi Jamila Khatoon and Rs.100 to her daughter Bibi Kulsum Ara per month. By order dated 2-5-1985 this Court directed him to pay Rs.125 as maintenance per month for both till the disposal of this revision.

2. In her application Jamila Khatoon has said that she was married to the petitioner about 6 years ago. Her dainmohar or dower, which had been fixed at Rs.2,5 0 and one gold mohar, was still unpaid. O. P. No.2, a daughter, was bow from their wedlock, who was then aged about 3 years and lived with her. After sometime the petitioner developed bad habits and started taking wine which was protested by her and so he began to neglect her. It was in the month of October 1981 that the petitioner turned her out from his house and so along with her child (O. P. No.2) she began to live with her parents who are very poor and unable to maintain her and her daughther. At the time of marriage her parents had given one cycle and one Janta watch and ten thousand bricks for the construction of the house to the petitioner but he did not construct the house. Inspite of persuation of the relations and well wisher the petitioner has not taken her back and also not paid her the maintenance. The petitioner had sufficient means, owning 6 acres of good agricultual land.

3. The petitioner in his show cause notice has said that O. P. No.1 is not the legal guardian of O. P. No.2 who is aged about 6 years. Rather he has claimed himself to be the legal guardian of O. P. No.2. It is stated in his show cause that for the last some years there was had relation between o. P. No.1 and his mother, on account of which domestic relation became intolerable and so in the month of October, 1981 he has divorced her. Even after the termination of the marriage the petitioner offered to keep O. P. No.2 with himself. Further the case of the petitioner is that the marriage of O. P. No.1 was performed at Rs.1,001 as prompt dower which was given to her in terms of ornaments and so there is no claim of any dower debt against him. The parents of O. P.1 and her relations are men of means. The petitioner is dependent on his parents, having no power of disposal of the property of his parents. His father had purchased about 8 Kathas of land in his name but the same has been pledged with the State Bank of India against an advance for the purchase of a buffallow, and the petitioner has only 1 Bigha of land over which he has got no power of disposal.

4. Jamila Khatoon (O. P. No.1) examined 5 witnesses whereas her husband-petitioner 4 witnesses. A. W.1 Zakir Hussain, A. W.2 Sheikh Abid, a. W.3 Md. Yusuf, A. W.4 Zamil Ahmad who have said that she was turned out after beating and that it was not correct that Talak had been given to her. She herself is witness No.3. She has said that there was no payment of dower debt at all nor was return of articles.1 Katha of laud has been given to arif by his maternal aunt. Petitioner is the only son of his father and his his three sisters have already been married. On behalf of the petitioner d. W.1 Sheikh Safiullah, who appears to be cousin of the petitioner, has said that a divorce has taken place in October 5 or b days before Dassehra in the year 1981, in the presence of the parents of Jamila Khatoon and that she was given Rs.1,001 as Dain mohar by Arif and her articles were returned to her. Talak has taken place in Panchayat in presence of Sheikh Arfi, Sheikh dukhi and Sabir Firoz besides him. D. W.2 similarly says about Talak and payment of Rs.1,001 in presence of 30-35 persons. According to him talak was pronounced three times orally. D. W.3 Sheikh Dukhi also says that Talak has been pronounced about 2 years ago in the presence of Safiullah and Sheikh Mohiuddin and Rs.1,001 was given the Sheikh Shahbuddin by md. Arif. The petitioner also says that