D K R CHINNASWAMY SAH Vs. RAJAMBA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff-appellant sued for a declaration that the respondent is not his wife & for a permanent injunction restraining her from calling herself the plaintiff's wife arid taking or confirming any proceedings against the plaintiff in that capacity. The case was that the plaintiff married the respondent in 1953, though his first wife was then, and is still, alive. Apparently, some disputes arose between the two subsequently, and, the respondent filed an application in the Magistrate's court under Section 488 Cri. P. O. This seems to be the reason for the plaintiff's filing the suit for the declaration and injunction.

(2.) Before the trial court, it was alleged by the plaintiff-appellant that there was no valid marriage by reason of the absence of the requisite religious ceremonies; but that has been found against by both the trial court and the lower appellate court. The position accordingly is that, while no doubt a proper form of marriage was gone through between the parties, the marriage itself was claimed to be void by reason of Act VI of 1949.

(3.) The trial court granted a decree for the declaration and injunction sought; but, on appeal, the learned Additional City Civil Judge came to the conclusion that, on the principle of pari delicto, the plaintiff ought not to be granted the relief. It is against this decree that the present appeal has been filed.