RAJINDER SINGH Vs. POMILA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 1-3-1983 by which the first appeal of the appellant, Rajinder Singh was dismissed in limine by a speaking order.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this appeal are that the appellant, Rajinder Singh married Smt. Pomila, respondent on 3-5-1981 according to Hindu/Sikh rities and ceremonies. The respondent filed a petition under Section 11 read with Section 5(1) and Section 12(l)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act for declaring the marriage between the appellant and the respondent null and void. The petition proceeded on the allegations that the marriage between the parties was solemnised at Delhi on 3-5-1981. No child was born out of the wedlock. It is averred that after the solemnisation of the marriage the respondent stayed with the appellant as his wife at House No. D-7, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi for about 4 days. Thereafter the respondent stayed at Delhi with her parents while the appellant went back and joined his duties in District Jalandhar. It was further stated that the respondent came to' Delhi on 25-5-1981 and the parties left for Goa on 27-5-1981 and stayed for about 20 days at the house of the elder sister of the respondent. The parties returned <PG>120</PG> to Delhi on 21-6-1981 from Goa. Thereafter the appellant again joined the School duties in District Jalandhar while the respondent remained at her parent's house. The appellant again came to Delhi around 1-7-1981 and took the respondent with him on 6-7-1981 to his parental house at Village Aur in District Jalandhar where the parties resided for about a week. The respondent came down to Delhi on 13-7-1981 and joined her school on 15-7-1981. The allegations proceeded further that on 22-8-1981 the appellant came to the house of the parents of the respondent and stayed upto 28-8-1981. It is stated that Smt. Balbir Kaur D/o. S. Mahna Singh of Village Bada Pind, near Phillaur, Distt. Jalandhar came to Delhi alongwith her aunt and on 28-8-1981, informed the respondent, her brother and parents, through S. Lachhman Singh Nagar of Sant Nagar, New Delhi that Balbir Kaur was already married to the appellant and her marriage with the appellant had taken place on 7-5-1975 at Bada Pind and their marriage was still subsisting. It is stated that the respondent was completely taken aback and shocked to know that the appellant was already married and that the precious life of the respondent had been ruined fraudulently by the appellant. It is further stated that they talked to the appellant immediately on 28-8-1981 who admitted his previous marriage with Smt. Balbir Kaur and left the house of the respondent's parents on the same day. The grievance made in the petition was that the consent of the respondent was obtained by fraud as to the material fact and circumstances concerning the appellant. The appellant never told the respondent about his previous marriage with Smt. Balbir Kaur and had the respondent knowledge of such marriage she would never have married the appellant. It was further alleged that the respondent learnt that the appellant on 21-7-81 had once again responded to an advertisement for a suitable boy in the matrimonial columns of "THE TRIBUNE". Reliance is placed upon the reply of the appellant in response to that advertisement which was sent to Box No. 4643 on 13-7-1981. On these allegations the declaration was sought that the marriage between the parties be declared null and void.

(3.) The appellant contested the petition and filed his written statement in opposition to the petition. The factum of marriage between the appellant and the respondent was not denied. It was stated that the marriage between the appellant and Smt. Balbir Kaur was not subsisting. The marriage was dissolved on 19-5-1976 before the Sub-Registrar of Nawanshahar, Punjab according to the custom prevailing amongst Jat Sikhs of Jalandhar District, Punjab. Reliance was placed on a registered document dated 20-5-1976 which was claimed to be duly attested by the SDM, Nawanshahar. It was further stated that during the exchange of information and pre-martial enquiry for the particulars of the parties the documents of divorce were shown to the respondent and other members of her family. The father and brother of the respondent were satisfied regarding the divorce. To sumup, the case of the appellant as disclosed in the written statement was that the respondent and her parents were fully aware that the marriage between the appellant and Balbir Kaur had been dissolved by a decree of divorce according to customary law and the question of suppression of material facts did not arise at all. It was denied that the consent of the respondent was obtained by fraud. The allegations that the appellant again applied in response to a matrimonial advertisement were denied and the stand taken was that the appellant did not send any letter on 13-7-1981 to any third party in response to any advertisement, The claim of the respondent for declaration that the marriage solemnised between the parties was null and void was repudiated. It was also alleged that the petition was a counter-blast to the petition filed by the appellant under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the Court of Senior Sub-Judge, Jalandhar.