KUMARI RAVI KANTA DEVI Vs. ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two appeals under Section 39 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Admittedly, Ashok Kumar Jain and Smt. Ravi Kanta Devi were married on September 16, 1969. Smt. Ravi Kanta Devi filed, in the court of the District Judge, Meerut, a petition under Section 25 of the Special Marriage Act for annulling the marriage by a decree of nullity. Sometime thereafter Ashok Kumar Jain filed a petition under Section 22 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights. The two petitions were tried together and evidence was recorded in the wife's petition under Section 25. By a judgment dated March 24, 1972, the Additional District Judge, Meerut, dismissed the wife's petition for annulment of the marriage. By another judgment of the same date he decreed the husband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Against the judgments in these two cases the wife has preferred these two appeals, F.A. F.O. No. 232 of 1972 is against the judgment dismissing the wife's petition and F.A.F.O. No. 233 of 1972 is against the judgment in the husband's petition. Since most of the facts are common, it will be convenient to dispose of both the appeals by one judgment.

(2.) ASHOK Kumar Jain and Ravi Kanta were both students of the same College at Baraut in 1967. They, apparently, fell in love with each other and they started exchanging love letters. Ravi Kanta's father, Padam Prasad, was negotiating for the marriage of Ravi Kanta elsewhere. On the morning of September 16, 1969, Ravi Kanta in the company of Ashok Kumar Jain, Mangal Sen Jain and Adish Kumar Jain went in a taxi to Meerut. There they went to the house of Sri Atma Saran Rastogi, Marriage Officer. He took them to his law chambers and there solemnised the marriage under the Special Marriage Act. After sometime Ravi Kanta came back to Baraut to her father's house and has remained there since then. She filed her petition on September 14, 1970, almost a year after the marriage. The grounds on which she sought annunlment of the marriage are contained in paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 of her petition, which read as follow:

(3.) THAT the formalities that have been observed to perform the alleged marriage, were done under the fear of death and as such consent of the party was not available to the Respondent in the eye of law.