Case: Krishna Pal vs Ashok Kumar Pal
Date of Judgement: 04-06-1982
Citation: 1982(2) CLJ 366.
Bench: Hon’ble Justice CHITTATOSH MOOKERJEE
Appellant: Krishna pal
Respondent: Ashok Kumar pal
Facts:
1. Plaintiff through a plaint filed a suit stating that on 20th Jan 1977 no marriage between him and the Defendant has taken place as per the Hindu laws and also the child born to the Defendant was not with the Plaintiff.
2. He said that, entries regarding the said marriage in registry Office dated were fraudulent and void.
3. The Defendant has contested that marriage between them was duly solemnized according to Hindu laws and the registration of the said marriage was properly made. The Defendant further contended that the child born to her was the result of the cohabitation between them.
4. Plaintiff’s Counsel urged to annull the marriage between him and the Defendant by a decree of nullity on the ground that the consent of the Plaintiff was obtained by force or by fraud.
Issue involved:
- Whether the marriage alleged above can declared Voidable as per Section 12 (1) (c) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
Obiter Dicta:
The Court states that, “The plaintiff has not prayed for restitution of conjugal rights or for dissolution of the alleged marriage, therefore neither Sec. 9 nor Sec 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act would be applicable to the facts of the present case.”
Another point is whether the present suit instituted by the Plaintiff in the trial court of Bankura forms a petition under the Hindu Marriage Act.
“Sub-sec (3) in Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has provided that every petition under the said Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction: –
i) The marriage was solemnized,
ii) The respondent at the time of the presentation of the petition resides;
iii) The parties to the marriage last resided; IV) the petitioner is residing at the time of the presentation of the petition, in a case where the respondent is, at that time, residing outside the territories to which this Act extends.
Therefore the plaint would be liable to be returned for presentation to the District Court.”
Rationale:
1. Any marriage solemnized in sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act means a marriage which has been solemnized in accordance with proper ceremonies. The Plaintiff’s allegation is that no marriage was solemnized between him and the Defendant. Therefore, sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act which provides for annulment of voidable marriage is not attracted to the present case.
2. Further the court stated that petition under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Act could not be entertained as the plaint has been presented more than one year after the alleged fraud was discovered by the plaintiff and Section 12 (2) (a) (i) of the Act would bar the Plaintiff from obtaining any relief by way of annulment or his marriage with the Defendant.
Judgement:-
The court accordingly disposes off the Plaintiff’s suit without any orders as to costs.
Conclusion:
The Plaintiff in this case filed a petition against the Defendant in order to declare their alleged marriage null and void by a decree under the Section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as he urged that no marriage between him and the Defendant took place as per the Hindu laws.
The court disallowed his case stating that the plaint has been presented more than one year after the alleged fraud was discovered by the Plaintiff. Moreover Section 12(1) (c) of the said act is applicable on those marriages which are duly solemnized with proper rituals under the Hindu Marriage Act. And in this case no marriage was solemnized between Plaintiff and the Defendant. Therefore Section 12 (1)(c) is not applicable.
Drafted By: Param Mansinghka
Edited By: Tanvi Mahajan, Publisher, Law Insider
Published On: February 15, 2022 at 22:30 IST