JUDGMENT : AIKMAN, J.:— On the 14th June last, the Joint Magistrate of Cawnpore made an order under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, directing the applicant, Nur Muhammad, to make a monthly allowance for the support of his wife, Musammat Aisha. Subsequently a decree was passed by the Civil Court in a suit brought by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights, whereby the husband was to pay his wife a monthly allowance of Rs. 4-4-O and allot her a house near his own for her residence. This decree was passed by consent of parties. Subsequently the husband applied to the Magistrate to cancel his order of the 14th June 1904. The Magistrate rejected the application. 2. The learned Sessions Judge has submitted the case for orders of this Court in revision and calls attention to the ruling in re Bulaki Das([1898] I.L.R., 23 Bom, 484.), wherein it is laid down that a decree of a Civil Court for restitution of conjugal rights supersedes a maintenance order passed by a Magistrate if the wife persists in refusing to live with her husband. The facts of that case are not exactly on all fours with those of the present, but in my opinion the principle therein laid down applies. The additional evidence taken by the Magistrate shows that the wife objects to the house which her husband has selected for liter residence. If that house does not answer the conditions laid down in the decree passed by consent of parties, the wife should, in my opinion, prefer an objection to the Civil Court, I hold that under the circumstances stated above, the order of the 14th of June, 1904, was superseded by the arrangement come to between the parties in the Civil Court, and that the order of the 14th June, 1904, ought to have been cancelled. I therefore direct that it be concealed.