DAULAT RAM Vs. SEEMA SHARMA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) No one appears for the petitioner. No one appeared for the petitioner even on the last date of hearing.

(2.) The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the order of the trial court dated 19.8.2013 which has rejected the application filed by the petitioner/defendant no.1 in the suit under Order VII Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).

(3.) A reading of the impugned order shows that the subject suit is a suit for recovery of moneys on account of damages caused to the plaintiffs/respondents for incurring expenses for preparation of the ceremonies of the marriage, and which marriage could not go through on account of illegal conduct of the petitioner/defendant no.1. Obviously such a suit is maintainable because the issue was not that of a marriage between Hindus being a matter of contract, but the issue in the suit is that false representation of marriage was given, but which marriage could not go through on account of the malafide act and attitude of the petitioner/defendant no.1, and consequently the petitioner/defendant no.1 is entitled to pay damages on account of moneys spent towards preparation of ceremonies of marriage. Such a suit plaint cannot be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 CPC