Lakshmana Rao, J.
1. The order for maintenance in favour of the 1st respondent is obviously illegal as independently of any legislative enactment, the law of Malabar does not recognise marriage as a legal institution, the relation being in truth not marriage but a state of concubinage into which the woman enters of her own choice and is at liberty to change when and as often as she pleases and as pointed out in Chantan v. Mathu I.L.R. (1915) 39 Mad. 957 and In re Bharata Iyer (1923) 46 M.L.J. 324 the offspring of such a connection Would be entitled to an order for maintenance against the father only If and when the mother tavazhi or tarwad is unable to maintain them. The Lower Court does, not find nor was it specifically alleged in the petition that the tavazhi or tarwad is unable to maintain the children and the order for maintenance cannot be upheld. The revision petition is therefore allowed and the order for maintenance is set aside.