1. We must follow the decision in Valu v. Ganga ILR 7 Bom. 34 and Vishnu Shambhog v. Manjamma ILR 9 Bom. 108 and hold that unchastity of
a widow deprives her wholly of her right to maintenance. No text has been cited in favour of the theory that a bare maintenance can be allowed.
The fact that there has been an agreement in our opinion makes no difference. It merely fixes the amount and the security. We must dismiss the
appeal with costs.
