PAHLAJ C CHHAPROO Vs. JYOTI P CHHAPROO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is original petitioners appeal against a judgment and decree passed by the Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, dismissing his petition claiming judicial separation under section 10(1)(b) and a decree of nullity of the marriage under section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

(2.) The parties to the petition knew each other from 1968 as they had occasion to travel together from Chembur to Flora Fountain where their respective offices were situate. It is the case of the petitioner-appellant that the respondent used to tell him that she was unhappy with her parents and brothers and she suggested to him that he should marry her. The petitioner initially told her that he was no inclined to marry her. He told her, after repeated requests by her, that he would like to marry a girl who was, at least, 4 to 5 years younger to him. The respondent assured the petitioner that she was younger to him by 4 to 5 years. It is the case of the petitioner that relying on this assurance, he agreed to marry her. The marriage was performed on 14th May, 1972 according to Hindu Vedic Rites and ceremonies. Four or five days after the marriage, the petitioner came across a certificate issued to her by the Secondary School Certificate Examination Board of Poona in which her date of birth was shown to be 15th December, 1935. With that date of birth, the respondent was definitely 4 to 5 years older to the petitioner who was born on 15th June, 1940. The petitioner confronted the respondent with the certificate of the Secondary School Certificate Examination. She told him that the date of birth recorded in the certificate was wrong and her father had already sworn an affidavit before a Magistrate stating that she was born on 15th December, 1941. It is the case of the petitioner that after persistent questioning by the petitioner, the respondent ultimately confessed that she was born on the date mentioned in the certificate. The petitioner was disturbed and got a shock. In fact, he actually cried and lost his mental peace. From that day, he ceased to have any marital relations with the respondent. He stated that he, however, went to Poona on 23rd May, 1972 as planned by them earlier for the purpose of honey-moon. Originally, he had proposed to stay at Poona for honey-moon for 7 days, but because of the shock he returned earlier. Even at Poona, he did not have any marital relations with the respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that he would not have agreed to marry the respondent if she had told him her correct age. The petitioner, therefore, claimed that his marriage with the respondent should be annulled by a decree of nullity, on the ground that the consent of the petitioner was obtained by fraud, in as much as, the respondent had told the petitioner that she was younger to him by, at least, 4 to 5 years.

(3.) The petitioner also claimed a decree for judicial separation under section 10(1)(b) on the ground that the respondent had treated the petitioner with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it would be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the respondent. Some of the instances of cruelty cited by the petitioner are :