1. The only substantial question of law formulated for consideration at the time of admission of second appeal reads thus:

“Whether the lower appellate court, while rejection the claim of 1st respondent for maintenance, has not committed an error of law in granting maintenance to 2nd respondent is not the legitimate son of the appellant even as per the lower appellate court.”

2. Defendant in O.S.No.595 of 1989 on the file of District Munsifs Court, Gingee, is the appellant herein.

3. Suit was filed by his wife and minor son, claiming maintenance under Sec.18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act.

4. In this Judgment, reference to parties will be according to their rank in the suit.

5. First plaintiff claimed that she is the legally wedded wife of defendant, and in their wedlock, second plaintiff was born to them. It is said that the marriage was according to Custom prevalent in their community. It is also said in para 3 of plaint that at the instance of his first wife, defendant is not properly, looking after her affairs and also that of her son, and she has to maintain the second plaintiff only by doing hard labour. It is said that the defendant is bound to maintain