RAM ISHWAR TEWARI Vs. ANIL MUKHIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been filed by one Ram Ishwar Tewari (who moves the matter in person with the leave of Court), the father of one Neha Tewari. The suit from which the present revision arises, bearing Title Suit No. 160 of 2018, was apparently filed for declaration to the effect that the so-called marriage, registered on December 06, 2017 between Neha Tewari and one Anil Mukhia, is void, inter alia for the fact that the said Anil Mukhia was and is an under aged person.

(2.) In such suit, the plaintiff, being the father of Neha Tewari, took out an application captioned to be one under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for temporary and ad interim injunction restraining the defendants/opposite parties, being the said Anil Mukhia and his relatives, from creating any obstruction in the path of the said Neha Tewari from visiting her paternal home if she desires. It was alleged in such application for injunction that the opposite parties, being in a position of dominance, will coerce his daughter to put pressure to the plaintiff to part with and/or arrange dowry for a large sum of money to the opposite party nos. 1 and

(3.) By virtue of the impugned order dated March 13, 2018, the court below rejected such application for temporary injunction on the finding that prima facie it appeared that the marriage took place on a date when Neha Tewari had become adult. The court below, as reflected from the impugned order, did not want to interfere with the marriage, which was solemnised between two adult persons, and held that the question whether the marriage certificate between the petitioner's daughter and the opposite party no. 1 was in accordance with law or not can be decided after taking evidence.