AJAY SHARMA Vs. NEHA SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband, a resident of U.S.A., through power of Attorney -mother, under the provisions of Section 19 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (wrongly mentioned as Family Court Rules) for seeking quashment of the complaint/ application filed by the respondent-wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and ensuing Hindu Marriage Act proceedings in Case No.81A/2015 HMA initiated by the respondent.

(2.) It is submitted that the appellant is a citizen of the United States of America, since July 21, 2006. He has produced a copy of his certificate of naturalization as Annexure P/2. It is an admitted position that marriage of appellant with the respondent had taken place on 24.2.2012 at Gwalior, M.P., India. After marriage, appellant had proceeded to United States of America and processed necessary paper work and documentation for obtaining Green Card for his wife. After completing the paper formalities, appellant learnt that respondent is not interested in moving to United States and co-habiting with the appellant and had some other intentions. Appellant had reason to believe that since respondent had got her name included in the documents like, Aadhar Card, Ration Card etc. pertaining to the family of the appellant's parents at Mumbai, appellant had moved the court of competent jurisdiction, in Massachusetts, for setting annulment of the marriage, on the ground that respondent married the appellant solely for procuring Green Card and not for living with the appellant as his wife. A copy of the complaint, which was filed by the appellant before the court of competent jurisdiction at Commonwealth of Massachusetts, has been enclosed as Annexure P/4. In column 5, it is mentioned under the heading "the plaintiff now doubts the validity of the marriage for the following reason;" The reason assigned is, "After we got married, she was able to obtain Green Card but refused to live with me and I believe she married me for purpose of obtaining a Green Card." On the strength of such complaint, Judgment of Divorce Nisi has been passed.

(3.) On the basis of such facts, it is submitted that proceedings initiated under the Hindu Marriage Act, by the respondent against the appellant is not maintainable and is as such without jurisdiction or authority of law. It is also submitted that the appellant being a U.S. citizen does not fall within the purview of the Hindu Marriage Act and therefore the provisions of said Act are not applicable to the appellant. It is pointed out that the appellant is being forced to submit himself to the jurisdiction of the court which actually has no jurisdiction to summon the appellant.