DHIR SINGH Vs. SMT. KAILASHI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a husband's second appeal hum the decree of the First Civil Judge of Muzaffarnagar dismissing his appeal from the decree of the Additional Munsif Muzaffarnagar issuing an injunction to restrain him from marrying again in the life time of his first wile. It raises a question of law of general importance -namely, whether a preventive injunction under the Specific Relief Act can be issued to restrain a Hindu husband from contracting a second marriage during the subsistence of the first. The Plaintiff Respondent Smt. Kailashi related the following story in her plaint. She was the lawfully wedded wife of the Defendant Appellant Dhir Singh being married to him according to Karao rites. The parties belong to the Jat community which permits a form of marriage known as ''Karao". This requires no ceremony except the payment of a sum of one rupee to the husband. She alleged that she was first married to Dhir Singh's brother Shyam Singh and had a daughter by him, but after five years Shyam Singh died, and a year after his death she was married to the Defendant Appellant Dhir Singh and had a daughter by him. Within a year and hall of the marriage he persuaded her to part with all her jewellery and transfer all her landed property in his favour by deed. He then got tired of her and started ill treating and beating her, and ultimately turned her out of his house while she was expecting her child, and since then she had been living with her parents. She obtained an order for maintenance against him under Section 488 Code of Criminal Procedure Recently she had learnt that the Appellant had decided to marry again and a marriage had in fact been arranged between him and the daughter of accused Defendant, though such marriage was forbidden by law. She pleaded that if her husband was permitted to marry again, she would suffer irreparable loss which could not be measured in money value nor compensated by payment of money. She also pleaded that if the Defendant married a second time, the interest of her daughter Indrawati would suffer and she would lose all prospects of being brought up in comfort. The Plaintiff asked for an injunction to restrain her husband Dhir Singh from contracting a second marriage during her life time and the second Defendant Bhagirath from giving his daughter in marriage to Dhir Singh. Both the Defendants contested the suit. Dhir singh admitted that he had decided to marry the second Defendant's daughter, but denied that the Plaintiff was his wife. He admitted that she had been married to his deceased brother Shyam Singh, but denied that after Shyam Singh's death there was any Karao marriage between him and her. He admitted that the Plaintiff had a child by his late brother and had a second child after Shyam Singh's death, but denied that this child was his, and alleged that the girl Indrawati was the off spring of the Plaintiff's immoral life. According to his version the Plaintiff went back to her father's house immediately on the death of her husband Shyam Singh, taking all her jewellery, money and other belongings with her. In the alternative, he pleaded that she was not entitled to an injunction as she had other adequate remedies in the event of his marrying a second time.

(2.) THE second Defendant Bhagirath while denying the Plaintiff's right to sue for an injunction, pleaded that he had given up all intentions of marrying his daughter to Dhir Singh and had in fact married her to another man called Vir Singh He, therefore, contended that as there was no possibility of his daughter being married to Dhir Singh, the suit must be dismissed.