Kuppuswami Ayyar, J.

1. This is a petition by the wife of the respondent for maintenance for herself and her child. That the petitioner is the wife of the respondent, and that the child is his are not disputed. As soon as the petition came on for hearing the respondent stated that he would await the result of a caste panchayat as regards the chastity of the petitioner and then state what he had to state. He subsequently pleaded that she was leading an unchaste life. Evidence was let in and the Joint Magistrate of Hosur found that she was leading an unchaste life and dismissed the petition.

2. On facts I do not think the learned Magistrate was wrong. A number of witnesses spoke to the fact that the petitioner was living with another man in a house built by him as husband and wife There was also an enquiry by the caste panchayat and she was ex-communicated.

3. I agree with the finding of the Magistrate that the petitioner was living an adulterous life and was therefore not entitled to maintenance.

4. But with regard to the child, it is admittedly the child of the respondent and the claim is made only from the date of the petition. It is stated on the authority of the ruling in Parva