Happell, J.

1. The appellant brought a suit for maintenance against her husband in the Court of the District Munsif of Palni. The District Munsif gave her a decree for Rs. 60 per annum for maintenance and Rs. 7 per annum for clothing from date of the plaint. The husband appealed and the Subordinate Judge of Dindigul reversed the decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit. Admittedly, the plaintiff has been living apart from her husband since about 1923, and the learned Subordinate Judge found that she had led an immoral life with the witness D. W. 2 between the years 1929 and 1931. The finding of the Subordinate Judge on this point cannot be challenged in second appeal, and, if proof that the plaintiff was leading an immoral life between the years 1929 and 1931, was a good defence to the suit, this second appeal must fail.

2. It is argued, however, for the plaintiff that she was in any event entitled to what is Called in the text books "starving maintenance." It has been held, no doubt, that a wife who has once led an immoral life may still be entitled to "starving maintenance" if she has repented and at the date when she claims maintenance is leading a moral life. In f