SURJIT KUMAR Vs. RAJ KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises out of a petition for annulment of marriage under section 12(,l) (c) of the Hindu Manage Act 1955 by Surj it Kumar petitioner, the husband of Raj Kumari respondent.

(2.) The appellant's case is that at the time of betrothal it was represented to him that the girl was virgin, but after marriage it was discovered that that was not correct and, in fact, on an earlier occasion, she had become pregnant and aborted. The appellant claims that his consent was, in the circumstances, obtained by fraud. Upon the pleadings of the parties, the following two issues were framed-

(3.) In support of the plea by the appellant that the consent to marriage was obtained by fraud, reliance has been placed on his own evidence as P.W. 5 and on the evidence of Hans Raj Public Witness . I an:d Gokal Singh Public Witness . 2. The apellant deposed that at the time of betrothal on 6/7-10-11)60, Nanak Chand, Bhola Math and another person came from the respondent's house and talked to the appellant and his mother about the marriage. He also siad that Bhola Nath stated that the character of the respondent was good. It is relevant to mention that the illegitimate relations alleged were with Bhola Nath, who is the husband of the respondent's father's sister, and the respondent had been brought up in Bhola Nath's is family eversince the 'death other mother while she was only three cr four years old. Hans Raj P. W. I is the brother in-law of the appellant. He spoke about Bhola Nath and another person having come to the appellant's house for negotiating the marriage. He further said, "those persons also stated that the girl was gold and would suit them". Gokal Singh P. W. '2 is also a close relation of the appellant He also deposed about a representation having been made by Bhola Nath and his companion that the girl was good natured. In support of the allegation about the unchastity of the girl, reliance is placed on letters exhibits 'PB', PC' and PD' written in the respondent's hand. These letters have been discussed in detail in the judgment under appeal and it is not necessary to discuss them over again. That is more so, because, in my opinion, even if she is held to be unchaste, as alleged by the appellant, it provides no ground, in the circumstances of this case, to grant the appeal. What emerges from the evidence of the afore- said three withesses, namely, the appellant Public Witness . 5, Hans Raj Public Witness . I and Gokal Singh Public Witness . 2, is that they generally represented that the girl was good. Tile grievance of the appellant mainly is that they ought to have disclosed that the girl had an unchaste career, particularly because Bhola Nath knew about it Relying on Shinhomal Jialdas vs. Manager Encumbered Estates, Sind Mt. Umrao Begun v. Sheikh Rahmat lluhi" and Thangachi Nachial. v. Ahmed Hussain Mulumjar, it is said that fraud in section 13 of the said Act should not be limited to its definition in section 17 of the Contract Act and it cannot be proved to the very hilt by direct evidence, but should be inferred from the various circumstances. For the purposes of this case, lam prepared to assume that fraud in section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act is not to be so limited. The heart of the problem required to be dealt with in this case is whether a general observation by the relations of the girl at the. e time of engagement to the effect that the girl was good amounts to obtaining consent of the husband by force or fraud within the meaning of section 12 (1) (e) of the said Act. I do not think that, without any enquiry being made from the witnesses, it was, in any sense, obligatory on their part to disclose to the appellant or his relations about the old unchastity of the girl, even if it was known to them. A perusal of section 13(l)(d) would show that the marriage may be annulled only if at the time of the marriage the girl was pregnant by some person other than the husband. That sheds a considerable light on the intention of the Legislature. It shows that past unchastity is not made a ground for annulment of marriage. Past illicit relations of a girl with some man may per se not be a factor taken into consideration by all persons agreeing to enter into a marriage tie This is not a circumstance, which, in all cases, would result in breakage of the marriage nagotiations. Can then it be said that the relations were under any obligation to disclose about the girl's past unchastity ? I think, the answer must be 'no'. Merely keeping quiet about such past history would not, therefore lead to a conclusion that the consent to marriage had been obtained by fraud. Relations of the girl cannot, without any enquiry in this behalf, be expected to speak about evary event in the girl's past life. Of course, if an enquiry had been made of them and they had given a wrong or an evasive reply things may have been different. But that is not the appellant's case. In my opinion, speaking generally that the girl was good and gold or was good natured does not entitle a husband to ask for annulment of marriage on the ground that if the relations had said that she had been unchaste he would not have agreed to the marriage. In 'Rattigan on Divorce' (second edition), page 3 8, it is said-