ORDER
R.S. Garg, J.
1. Heard.
2. The grievance of the applicant is that the first petition of the wife for grant of maintenance was rejected by the Courts on the ground that she was living an adulterous life, therefore, the second application could not be allowed. From the orders passed by the two Courts, it appears that after the first order attained finality, the husband condoned the lapses committed by the wife and the parties started living together. It is only after the second desertion, the wife has filed the second application.
3. After the husband had condoned the lapses committed by the wife, the effect of the first order would stand washed off, and, the wife certainly would be entitled to claim maintenance on a fresh cause of action.
4. So far as the question of the amount of maintenance being excessive is
concerned, the same can straight away be rejected, because the Court below has allowed hardly a sum of Rs. 350/- per month to the respondent.
5. I find no reason to interfere. The petition is dismissed.
6. Misc. Criminal Case dismissed.
