RAJNI BALA Vs. RAJESH DHIMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 9.7.2014 whereby the petition filed under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for declaring the marriage of the parties as nullity, has been allowed. Put shortly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein are that the marriage of the appellant with the respondent was solemnized on 19.7.2009 according to Hindu ceremonies at Amritsar. Out of the said wedlock, no child was born. Prior to the performance of the marriage, the respondent was divorcee as his previous marriage was dissolved by way of decree of divorce dated 12.6.2007. Before the marriage, the parents of the appellant had shown the agreement dated 27.12.2007 of divorce to the respondent and his family members that the appellant had been divorced from her first husband, namely, Satish Kumar by way of agreement in writing. After the marriage, the appellant-wife started creating scenes on trifle matters and also created unhealthy scenes and kept the atmosphere of the house in tense. The respondent brought the matter into the notice of the parents of the appellant but to no avail. On 12.9.2010, the appellant left the company of the respondent along with all the gifts and gold jewellery and cash lying in the house by stating that she was going just for 2/3 days and refused to return back. However, later on, with the intervention of respectables, the dispute was resolved and the respondent attended the marriage of the brother of the appellant. After passing of considerable time, when the appellant did not turn back, the respondent again approached the appellant and the parents of the appellant refused to send their daughter to her matrimonial home. Thereafter, the respondent demanded a copy of order of dissolution of earlier marriage of the appellant with her previous husband Satish Kumar. Upon this, the parents of the appellant told that the earlier marriage of the appellant had not been dissolved by any competent court of law and they have performed the marriage only to enjoy with the money of the respondent who was a Central Government employee. Accordingly, the respondent filed a petition under Section 12 of the Act for declaring the marriage of the parties as nullity or in the alternative petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage of the respondent with the appellant by passing decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The said petition was contested by the appellant-wife by filing written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections in the written statement, it was pleaded that by showing agreement of divorce dated 27.12.2007, it was brought to the notice of the respondent and their parents that the appellant had been divorced from her first husband Satish Kumar who after verifying the same agreed for the marriage. It was further pleaded that after the marriage, the respondent and his family members started harassing, beating and maltreating the appellant-wife for bringing inadequate dowry. They also demanded a car. According to the appellant, her father had given Rs. 10,000/- besides sweets, clothes and other articles on the occasion of Lohri, 2010. At the time of marriage of brother of the appellant on 19.9.2010, her parents had given clothes and Rs. 30,000/- in cash to the respondent and his family members for purchasing electronic articles. Further, on Karva Chauth, the parents of the appellant had also given a sum of Rs. 10,000/- in cash to the respondent. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. From the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues:-

(2.) The trial court took issues No. 1 and 2 together being interconnected and on appreciation of evidence led by the parties decide the same in favour of the husband and against the wife holding that the consent of the respondent for marriage with the appellant was obtained on the basis of false representations regarding dissolution of her previous marriage with Satish Kumar by way of decree of divorce. Issues No. 2 and 3 being interconnected were decided together in favour of the respondent-husband holding that the petition for divorce was maintainable and as such the respondent was entitled to get his marriage dissolved by the appellant as per Section 12(1)(C) of the Act. Accordingly, the court below vide judgment and decree dated 9.7.2014 declared the second marriage of appellant-Rajni with respondent-Rajesh Dhiman as nullity as her previous marriage with Satish Kumar was not dissolved by way of decree of divorce by any competent court of jurisdiction at the time of solemnizing her second marriage with the respondent. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there was a divorce between the parties by Panchayatnama and in such a situation; the petition under Section 12 of the Act was not maintainable. In case, the respondent had any remedy, he could file a petition under Section 11 of the Act. It was urged that the petition filed under Section 12 of the Act was beyond limitation as the marriage was solemnized on 19.7.2009 and the petition was filed on 16.11.2010. It was also urged that the husband knew about the earlier marriage of the appellant with Satish Kumar which was dissolved by Panchayatnama.