LAWS(PAT)-2000-12-29

R P MISHRA Vs. RUNKI DEVI

Decided On December 20, 2000
R P Mishra Appellant
V/S
Runki Devi Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a miscellaneous appeal. The matter originally arises out of divorce proceedings between one Bijay Krishan Mishra and Runki Devi. This was a matter which was filed before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna. The case was registered as Matrimonial Case No. 123/95 between Bijay Krishan Mishra v. Runki Devi and five others. The case was filed under the Hindu Marriage Act 1955. Bijay Krishan Mishra was seeking a declaration (under Section 12 of the Act) that the marriage between him and the first respondent be declared as a nullity. The judgment is dated 19th September, 1998.

(2.) IN the long considered judgment running into 25 pages, the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna framed five issues for the determination of the case. The issues as framed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna as on record are; (1) Whether the case as filed is maintainable ?; (2) Whether the petitioner has a valid cause of action for the case ?; (3) Whether the consent of the petitioner, for the marriage, sought to be annulled on the decree of nullity sought, was obtained by force ?; (4) Whether the petitioner is entitled have the marriage between him and first respondent annulled ?; (5) To what other relief or reliefs the petitioner is entitled ? The learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna took the third issue first as an only important issue for the case and came to the conclusion that the petitioner i.e. the husband, Bijay Krishna Mishra had not been able to prove that the marriage with the first respondent had taken place against his consent. This issue was decided against the petitioner. The marriage has been held as having taken place, and validly.

(3.) THE totality of the lower Court record leaves one wondering the divorce case had in fact been filed by the husband Bijay Krishna Mishra. The record reads more as a rear guard action of parents of the groom, father and mother both, who refuse to accept the marriage of their son, who they call their 'handsome son' with a bride who they with no hesitation call an 'ugly black girl'.