AMAL BANARJEE @ AMAL KUMAR BANARJEE Vs. PADMABATI BANARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision under Section 401 read with 397 Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the Petitioner seeking to challenge the Order Dated 29.6.2002 passed by the Learned S.D.J.M.,Karanjia in C.M.C. No. 45 of 2001 directing payment of Rs. 480 as monthly maintenance to the Opp. Party -wife from the date of application.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has sought to challenge the impugned order by stating that the Trial Court was in error in holding that a valid marriage subsists between the present Petitioner (husband) and the Opp. Party (wife). He submitted that the claim of the wife is untrue for three reasons - (i) the Petitioner is Bengali by caste whereas the Opp. Party is Oriya Brahmin and although marriage is not restricted between inter -castes, yet generally Bengali people are not contracting marriage with Oriya Brahmin, (ii) the family members of the Petitioner have not accepted the Opp. Party as the really married wife of the Petitioner as the Petitioner did not keep any physical relation with the Opp. Party and (iii) P.W.2 was not the regular Purohit of the Petitioner and the said witness claims that he performed the marriage on the request of the regular Purohit, namely, Ram Chandra Hota. Learned Counsel further submitted that the Petitioner married one Sipra Banarjee in the year 1991 and though he was separated from her in the year 1993 and obtained a decree of divorce in the year 1996, yet at the behest of the well -wishers, he was re -united with the said Sipra Banarjee through compromise. It was further submitted that the father & mother of the said Sipra Banarjee have given their evidence & therefore, since the Petitioner has a valid legal marriage with said Sipra Banarjee, the present Opp. Party - Padmabati Banarjee could not be taken to be the legally married wife of the Petitioner.

(3.) I have perused the impugned judgment and the lower Court and from the same, I find that the present Petitioner had records originally filed a written statement before the Trial Court on 15.12.2001. In the said written statement, no averment was made by him of his erstwhile wife - Sipra Banarjee. It appears that the Petitioner completely amended his written statement on 23..5.2002 introducing the fact of pre -existing marriage along with the evidence of such marriage i.e. the voter list.