LAWS(MAD)-2008-4-361

GANESAN Vs. G PUSHPAM

Decided On April 22, 2008
GANESAN Appellant
V/S
G. PUSHPAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is the husband of the respondent. Earlier the petitioner married the elder sister of the respondent. It is stated in the Maintenance Claim Petition that twenty years back, the marriage between them was held and out of the said wedlock, two children were born to them. Even though son of the parties were impleaded in the Maintenance case, since he has subsequently attained majority, he is out of the Court.

(2.) THE respondent contends that the petitioner is having 10 acres of Punja land, 10 acres of nanja land, four houses and a medical shop in the name and style of "Muthumari Medicals" in Kamuthi Town and he is also doing contract works. By means of the above said avocations, he has been drawing more than Rs.1 lakh per month. She had taken a plea that even though the petitioner had married her own sister, relying his representation that he divorced his first wife in a Village Panchayat and then she accepted for the marriage. THE learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi has entertained the claim of the respondent and granted the relief of maintenance in her favour. THE matter was carried before the Fast Track Court, Ramanathapuram by this Petitioner in C.R.P.No.9 of 2006 and the said Revisional Court has dismissed the revision on 11.09.2006, confirming the order of the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Kamuthi. Both the Courts have viewed that even though the plea of validity of second marriage has been taken up, it is for this petitioner to establish before the Civil Court. THE learned Judicial Magistrate has relied upon a decision of this Court reported in (2003) M.L.J (Crl) 204 (Seerangan vs. Selvi), in which after referring to a decision of the Karnataka High Court, this Court has observed thus:

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent would garner the support from the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2008(2) CTC 308 (Chand Patel Vs. Bismillah Begum & another), in which it is held that: "If a marriage held to be irregular, marriage will subsist for all purpose unless declared to be void by a Competent Court and wife and children born out of such marriage are entitled to maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C till such a declaration is made."