( 1 ) THIS is a plaintiffs appeal arising out of a suit for maintenance brought by her against her husband the defendant-respondent. She claimed maintenance for three years at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month and also claimed future maintenance at Rs. 100/- per month.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff alleged that she was the legally married wife of the respondent and she had lived with him for some time after her marriage, that her husband treated her cruelly and had driven her away after taking her clothes and ornaments and she was forced to come back to her fathers home and had been living with her father for eight years prior to the institution of the suit. She alleged that the defendant had remarried another woman and was not maintaining the appellant.

( 3 ) THE defendant-respondent contested the suit Inter alia on the ground that the parties were not married according to legal rites and since the plaintiff was impotent she could not be legally married to the respondent. It was alleged that the genital organs of the plaintiff were not normal and she was unfit for sexual intercourse and was incapable of begetting children and consequently the marriage between the parties was a nullity. The respondent further denied that he had maltreated the plaintiff.

( 4 ) THE parties produced medical evidence on the question of physical condition of the appellant. The appellant got hereself examined by Dr. Preetam Kaur, while the respondent relied on the evidence of Dr. (Smt) Savitri who had also examined the appellant. Dr. Preetam Kaur who examined the appellant at her own request and at the request of her brother gave the following report :

"she is a woman of average height and weight. Her external genital organs appear normal for her age. The vagina is slightly narrow and admits one finger easily. The hymen shows old rupture. From the above findings Srimati Ram Devi appears to be physically fit for sexual intercourse. "

Dr. Savitri, Medical Officer Ujhani Female Dispensary, en-mined the appellant at the instance of the defendant. According to the doctor the external appearance of the genital organs of the plaintiffs was normal and the breasts wen very much under-developed. The internal examination per vaginum revealed that there were very few pubic hair, labia majora and labia minora were under-developed and the hymen had an old tear. Only one finger could be inserted with great difficulty as the vagina was very narrow. The cervix was very hardly reached which showes that it was under-developed. In her opinion the plaintiff was not fit for marriage and was unfit for sexual intercourse.

( 5 ) THE trial Court held that the appellant was not impotent and was not incapable of bearing children, that the defendant had ill-treated the plaintiff and had remarried and thus the plaintiff was entitled to get past main-tenance as claimed by her and also future maintenance at the rate of rs. 50/- per month, it accordingly decreed the suit.

( 6 ) THE respondent appealed from the aforesaid decree and the Civil Judge allowing the appeal remanded the case to the trial Court for redecision according to law in the light of the observations made by him. The Civil judge was of the opinion that while Dr. Savitri was examined in Court Dr. Preetam Kaur who had examined the appellant was not produced in Court and one Kishori Lal Mehrotra gave evidence on the basis of the two reports of the lady doctors. The Civil Judge directed that another medical examination of the appellant be conducted by soma other expert doctor.

( 7 ) AFTER remand the plaintiff produced Dr. Preetam Kaur. After the conclusion of the arguments before the trial Court the respondent made an application to the Court for getting the appellant examined by another lady Doctor of Lucknow or Agra. That application was, however, rejected and the Munsif gave the same finding which he had given earlier and decreed the suit. The respondent again appealed from the decree of the trial Court. Before the