SANTILATA DEI Vs. CHAMPA BEWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT No. 1 is the appellant. Suit was filed for declaration that the plaintiffs are the successors of late Damodar Patra and for injunction against defendant No. 1 seeking to restrain her from availing the service benefits of late Damodar Patra. It is not disputed that plaintiff No. 1 is the mother of Damodar Patra, whereas plaintiff No. 2 is the daughter of Damodar Patra through his first wife. It is alleged by the plaintiffs that the present appellant is no way connected with the family and was not the wife of late Damodar Patra.

(2.) THE present appellant filed written statement claiming that after the death of first wife, Damodar had married her. She had also raised the question of maintainability of the suit.

(3.) IN the present case, there is no specific pleading or material on record to prove that a widower cannot marry for the second time without undertaking the formal marriage with a 'Sahada' tree. In the absence of any pleading or proof regarding such custom, it was unnecessary for the Courts below to hold that marriage had not been performed in accordance with customary rites. As such the finding of the Courts below that there was no marriage between the appellant and Damodar cannot be sustained.