Subba Rao, J.-I have had the advantage of perusing the judgment prepared by my learned brother. I agree with the conclusion arrived at by him. But I do not propose to express my opinion on the question whether the first wife living apart from her husband on the ground that he married a second wife is entitled to maintenance by reason of the second marriage alone; nor is it necessary to express my view on the second question whether such marriage in itself would be a sufficient ground before Act XIX of 1946 for awarding maintenance to the first wife. I agree with my learned brother on the interpretation of the provisions of Act XIX of 1946. But if the plaintiff is entitled to maintenance only under the Act, I would confine her right to maintenance only from the date of the Act. But on the finding of my learned brother that she was abandoned by her husband, with which I agree, she would be entitled to arrears of maintenance for the period before the Act also.

Ramaswami, J.-This is an appeal preferred against the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge of Tenali in O.S. No. 17 of 1948.

The facts are: The first defendant Ramakotayya is a substantial Kamma ryot of Yadlapalli.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document