Rajinder Sharma Vs. Arpana
J U D G M E N T
appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 30.5.2009 passed by the
High Court of Punjab and Haryana.
the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge of the High Court remitted the appeal
to the trial Court with a direction to the trial Court to allow the respondent herein
to adduce additional evidence and by giving corresponding right to the appellant
herein to rebut that evidence.
facts of the case are rather peculiar.
petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act for annulment of the marriage
was filed by the appellant stating therein that he developed friendly
relationship with respondent as they had their business premises adjacent to each
other. The case which has been made by the appellant is that respondent requested
him to perform a mock marriage with her in order to enable her to avoid the predicament
of marrying a boy who has been selected by her parents and who is not of her liking.
The case of the appellant is that such a mock marriage took place in the
presence of some relatives and some photographs were also taken. Thereafter, the
marriage of appellant with another girl was fixed but that could not be solemnized
as relations from the side of that girl possibly came to know about the
existence of the mock marriage.
may be noted that respondent filed an FIR for commission of an offence under Section
420 IPC against the appellant.
the appellant filed a petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
for declaring the marriage as null and void.
trial Court allowed the appellant's petition for annulment of marriage. Challenging
the same, respondent filed an appeal before the High Court and along with that
she filed an application for adducing additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27
High Court instead of deciding the controversy, remitted the matter to the
trial Court and directed the trial Court to allow the application of the respondent
for adducing additional evidence by giving corresponding right to the appellant
to rebut that evidence and also directed the trial Court to decide the matter afresh.
appears that most of the documents which are sought to be adduced by way of
adducing evidence are on record. In that view of the matter, the order to remit
the matter to the trial Court is not warranted. The High Court, being the first
appellate Court, is a Court of both fact and law. Therefore, it will be in the
interest of justice for the High Court to decide the controversy in accordance
the facts of the case the order of remand will merely prolong the proceedings between
the aforesaid reasons, we cannot sustain the order of the High Court, which is set
aside. We request the High Court to decide the appeals in accordance with law
and as early as possible and definitely by the end of year 2011.
these directions, the appeals are disposed of. There will no order as to costs.
(ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)