SURJIT KAUR Vs. KARNAIL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated January 11, 1988, of the Additional District Judge, Ropar allowing the husband's petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against Surjit Kaur Appellant.

(2.) KARNAIL Singh husband-petitioner was married in Kareva form of marriage to Surjit Kaur respondent No. 1 in April 1985. The respondent had a 12 years old son from her previous marriage with one Piara Singh. According to the petitioner, the respondent represented that she was earlier married to Piara Singh, who had died leaving the aforesaid son, who at the time of respondent's second marriage with the petitioner was about 12 years, old. After about six months of the marriage, the petitioner discovered that Piara Singh, the previous husband of the respondent, had not died but was alive and was living at village Theda, Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan (Himachal Pradesh ). He, therefore, stopped living with the respondent and sent her a notice dated October 28,1985, and since then the parties had been living separately from each other. The petitioner prayed for the marriage with the respondent being declared void on the ground that, her earlier spouse was alive and the respondent's marriage with the petitioner was null and void. The petitioner, impleaded Piara Singh as respondent No. 2 in the petition.

(3.) IN the written statement, respondent No. 1 stated that she was married to Piara Singh deceased about 24 years back, After 8 or 9 years of marriage with her, Piara Singh contracted some mental ailment and he went away from the house. A son was born from respondent's marriage with Piara Singh after about three months of his departure from the house. Piara Singh had not been heard of since then. Through Gian Singh and one Mohinder Kaur respondent's marriage with the petitioner took place as the respondent had no source of income and she had to fend for her son as well It was admitted that an agreement in writing was executed between the parties at the time of marriage on April 10, 1985. The petitioner knew these facts and had made enquiries that said Piara Singh had not been heard of for about 13 years and was, therefore, presumed to be dead. In fact, according to the respondent, the trouble arise, because the petitioner's -brother Gurmail Singh and his wife became greedy on account of property held by the petitioner and they instigated the petitioner against the respondent.