NEERAJ KUMAR SINGH Vs. TESU KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Sec. 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against judgment and decree dtd. 4/11/2015 and 21/11/2015, respectively, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhagalpur in Matrimonial Case No. 81 of 2009.

(2.) The conspectus of case of the parties is that the respondent filed Matrimonial Case No. 81 of 2009 under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'HMA') against the appellant/opposite party seeking restitution of conjugal rights against the appellant directing him to discharge his marital obligations towards the respondent. For the sake of convenience, we will be using nomenclature as used in the present appeal for further reference. From the petition of the respondent before the learned Family Court, it appears that she had been living in Bhagalpur and working in LIC in one of its Branches at Bhagalpur. The appellant solemnized marriage with the respondent on 9/11/2003 according to Hindu Rites and Customs at Bhagalpur. Both appellant and respondent used to work in LIC and they were posted at LIC Office, District-Sahebganj, Jharkhand in the year 2003 after joining the organization. Both of them were residing at Bhagalpur and they were accustomed to commute monthly by train together and also by motorcycle. The close association resulted in special affinity between them and it culminated in love. The appellant and respondent decided to solemnize marriage without any interference or intervention of their family members since they belonged to different castes and accordingly the marriage was solemnized at the residence of the petitioner/respondent in presence of close relatives including sister and brother-in-law (Didi and Jija Ji) of the respondent as she has been residing in a rented house at Adampur, Bhagalpur. The marriage was solemnized by a Pandit, namely Pankaj Kumar Jha. The appellant and the respondent started leading their conjugal life peacefully for about 02 years but when the fact came to the knowledge of the parents of the appellant, they got enraged. They started pressurizing the appellant to solemnize marriage with another lady of same caste with handsome dowry. Tempted by the allurement of money and instigated by his mother, the appellant started demanding Rs.10,00,000.00 from the respondent and on non fulfillment of this demand, the appellant started maintaining some distance from the respondent and later on solemnized marriage with another woman after taking dowry. Coming to know about the second marriage of the appellant, the respondent went to the native place of the appellant but the respondent was abused and threatened by the family members of the appellant. Due to continuous demand of dowry, the respondent got instituted an FIR against the appellant and his mother for offence under Sec. 498A of IPC and Sec. % of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently, several litigation started due to adamant attitude of the appellant and his family members. The respondent continued her parleys with the appellant and his mother directly or through other persons persuading them to allow the respondent to live with the appellant. The respondent submitted that the cause of action arose on 5/4/2006, when the appellant refused to lead conjugal life with the respondent after his second marriage and thereafter, the respondent filed the petition before the learned Family Court for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent further submitted that marriage of the respondent with appellant was a valid marriage and she has got right of restitution of conjugal rights and she was ready to live with the appellant as his wife to lead married conjugal life. Thus, the respondent prayed for passing a decree for restitution of conjugal right against the appellant, directing him to discharge his marital obligation with the respondent petitioner.

(3.) The appellant joined the trial before the learned Family Court, Bhagalpur filing his written statement claiming that petition was not maintainable. The appellant denied the claim of his marriage with the respondent as mischievously false and baseless. The appellant submitted that the respondent-Tesu Kumari was posted at Sahebganj LIC Branch in the year 2003 and the appellant was also posted in the same service with same status and they were working in the same office and had friendly relation as well as official relation. The appellant had no inkling about feelings being carried by the respondent towards the appellant. The respondent got a voluntary transfer from Sahebganj to Bhagalpur in March, 2005 whereas the appellant remained at Sahebganj till August, 2007 and was transferred to Bhagalpur in August, 2007. The appellant solemnized marriage with one Bibha Kumari on 23/11/2005. Thereafter, the respondent revealed her intention to marry with the appellant. The appellant was threatened by the respondent and the appellant filed Sanha No. 349 of 2006. The respondent also filed a Sanha No. 1467 of 2006 in which she made claim about her marriage but without disclosing any date, place and manner. She also procured a marriage certificate without disclosing the name of the temple which allegedly issued the certificate. The respondent gave a petition before the Senior Divisional Manager, LIC, Bhagalpur where she mentioned that in November, 2003, they had solemnized marriage and they started living as husband and wife but without any date. Thereafter, the respondent filed a criminal case and in the FIR she did not mention any arranged marriage as claimed by her subsequently and only stated that since 9th of November, 2003, they had been living like husband and wife while both of them had been working at Sahebganj. No where did she disclose the names of persons in presence of whom the marriage was solemnized. The appellant was arrested and was put under custody and the appellant got bail from this Court when the document was brought on record showing that the respondent claimed herself as unmarried in the office of LIC till 14/3/2007. The appellant in his written statement denied ever living as husband and wife with respondent and if they solemnized marriage on 9/11/2003, why would the respondent get voluntary transfer to Bhagalpur in 2005 when the appellant remained there even after 2005? The appellant reiterated that there was never a relationship of love between the appellant and respondent and they were co-workers having good relationship and they never talked about any marriage. Further, the appellant and respondent never lived as husband and wife. The appellant denied the marriage as claimed by the respondent and claimed that this fact came to his knowledge only in January, 2006 when the respondent revealed her true intention. Even the allegation of demand of dowry was completely false and baseless. The appellant further stated in his written statement that he has only one wife, namely, Bibha Kumari and there is no other marriage and from his wife Bibha Kumari he has two children. Thus, the appellant stated that there was no question of restitution of conjugal rights as the respondent is not the wife of the appellant and, therefore, the petition of the respondent/petitioner was liable to be dismissed.