Ved Prakash Vaish, J.

1. Heard Sri Amit Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Satish Chandra Kashish, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The appellant-husband has filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as C.P.C.) against the judgment and decree dated 10.07.2006 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gonda in Civil Appeal No. 9 of 2006 whereby the appeal filed by the respondent No. 3 herein-wife was allowed and the appellant was directed to pay the maintenance from the date of filing of the suit.

3. Succinctly stating that the facts of the case are that Smt. Kiran Srivastava (respondent No. 3 herein/plaintiff in the regular suit) filed a suit for maintenance, which was registered as Regular Suit No. 229 of 1999 titled as Smt. Kiran Srivastava vs. Ganga Prasad Srivastava. The case of respondent No. 3 is that she was married with Ganga Prasad Srivastava (appellant herein) in the year 1985 according to Hindu Rites and Ceremonies, after marriage they started living as husband and wife; in the year 1987, the respondent again married with one Rekha; the petitioner was tortured and she was