Skip to content


Mulji Bhaishankar and anr. Vs. Bai Ujam - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1889)ILR13Bom218
AppellantMulji Bhaishankar and anr.
RespondentBai Ujam
Excerpt:
hindu law - widow--widow's right to separate maintenance--widow directed by the husband to he maintained in the family house--just cause for not living in family house--imputation of unchastity. - .....by his will, made the plaintiff's right to a widow's maintenance conditional on her residing at kava. the defendants who are in possession of the husband's property under the will, refused to give her any maintenance unless she lived with them there. according to the vyavastha no. 226, quoted at page 261 of volume i of shamacharan sarkar's 'vyavastha chandrika,' a widow is 'not entitled to maintenance by residing elsewhere without a just cause if she was directed by her husband to be maintained in the family house.' in the present case, the assistant judge has found that the defendants have sought to blacken the plaintiff's character by raking up, without justification, an old scandalous story against her, and is of opinion that she could not, under the circumstances, live happily at.....
Judgment:

Birdwood, J.

1. The plaintiff's husband, by his will, made the plaintiff's right to a widow's maintenance conditional on her residing at Kava. The defendants who are in possession of the husband's property under the will, refused to give her any maintenance unless she lived with them there. According to the Vyavastha No. 226, quoted at page 261 of Volume I of Shamacharan Sarkar's 'Vyavastha Chandrika,' a widow is 'not entitled to maintenance by residing elsewhere without a just cause if she was directed by her husband to be maintained in the family house.' In the present case, the Assistant Judge has found that the defendants have sought to blacken the plaintiff's character by raking up, without justification, an old scandalous story against her, and is of opinion that she could not, under the circumstances, live happily at Kava. He also finds that the defendants have interpolated a passage into the will, for future use against the plaintiff, to the effect that the will had become necessary because she had not acted according to the testator's commands. We think that the plaintiff has, a just cause for not living with the defendants; and on this ground we confirm the decision of the Assistant Judge with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //