TANUSHREE BANIK Vs. LOVAN TIKADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revisional application has been directed, at the instance of the defendant-wife, against an order whereby the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure was rejected. It is argued that the present suit, substantially for declaration that the marriage registration was void ab initio and for declaration that there was no matrimonial relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, was barred by res judicata in view of dismissal of a previous suit for similar reliefs. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that the plaint of the present suit admits the factum of dismissal of the previous suit and as such ought to have been rejected at the outset.

(2.) Controverting such argument, learned counsel for the opposite party argues that the present suit was filed before a Civil Judge (Junior Division) for declaration as to the marriage registration of the parties being void and for declaration that no matrimonial relationship existed between the parties, and for consequential reliefs. On the other hand, it is submitted that the previous suit was filed before a District Judge under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for a declaration that the marriage between the parties was a nullity in terms of the said provision of law. As such, it is argued, the previous suit was of different scope than the present one and the Court which took up the prior suit was not "competent", as envisaged under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, due to lack of jurisdiction to grant the reliefs sought in the present proceeding. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the order of the Trial Court refusing the prayer for rejection of the plaint was perfectly justified.

(3.) Upon hearing both sides, it is seen that the current suit was filed for the following reliefs: