M.HARIRAMAKRISHNAN Vs. SUDHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, aggrieved by the concurrent finding of the trial court and the lower appellate court in rejecting his prayer for declaration of the marriage between him and the respondent as null and void under Sec. 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has preferred this second appeal.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of this second appeal are as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial court, having found that the appellant had established a case for nullity of marriage, erred in granting a decree of divorce when the main prayer was for a decree of nullity and that the lower appellate court had erroneously held that the case under Sec. 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was not made out by the appellant, in the absence of any challenge by the respondent to the finding of the trial court. The learned counsel for the appellant, on facts, submitted that the respondent had admitted that the mobile number in the abortion form maintained in the hospital at Mumbai belonged to her, which proves that she underwent abortion; that she had suppressed the said fact from the appellant and therefore, it would amount to fraud as to the material fact concerning the respondent; and that hence, the appellant is entitled to a decree of nullity.