( 1 ) THIS is a wifes second appeal in a suit for maintenance.

( 2 ) THE trial Court decreed the suit for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 40/- per month. The lower appellate Court has modified the decree by reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs. 40/per month to Rs. 10/- per month.

( 3 ) THE appeal in this Court is directed against the reduction of the amount of the maintenance. It is an appeal by the wife. The respondent husband has challenged the factum of the marriage between the parties, by filing a cross-objection. I shall take up the cross-objection first.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the appellant, there was no evidence to show that saptpadi was performed and that in the absence of proof of saptpadi, there could have been no marriage between the parties. He relied on Bhaurao Shanker Lokhande v. The State of maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1564, which was a case of prosecution for bigamy under Section 494 of the I. P. C. J and obviously somewhat different consideration as to burden of proof prevailed. In the present case, there is evidence to show that pau-puja was done according to the custom of the caste. There is nothing on the record to show tha