ORDER OF REFERENCE KRISHNASWAMI NAYUDU, J. :- This appeal arises out of a suit for separate maintenance and residence by a Hindu wife against her husband, for herself, and fat her minor daughters.

2. The first plaintiff, the wife, was married to the defendant 20 years prior to the suit. The 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs are two of the surviving daughters of the marriage. The plaintiffs case is that on account of cruelty on the part of the husband, the first plaintiff was obliged to leave him. The suit for maintenance was resisted by the husband on the ground that she was living away from him without sufficient cause and that he was prepared to take her back and allow her to live with him. The defendant married a second wife, as the first plaintiff did not bear him a male child, which marriage was, according to him, with the approval of the first plaintiff.

3. The learned Subordinate Judge did not consider it necessary to examine the allegations of cruelty in view of the passing of the Hindu Married Womens Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance Act 19 of 1946. A contention was raised on behalf of the defendant that the said Act was not retrospective in character and would not a