Pallavi Bhardwah Vs. Pratap
Chauhan
J U D G M E N T
GANGULY, J.
1.
Leave
granted.
2.
Heard
learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record.
3.
This
appeal is from a judgment and order dated 25.4.2008 passed by the Division Bench
of the High Court in First Appeal No.328/2008. The Division Bench of the High
Court in the impugned judgment disposed of the First Appeal with certain directions
relating to so-called matrimonial dispute between the parties.
4.
The
case is based on very peculiar facts. The grievances of the appellant are that
there is no marriage between him and the respondent but the respondent in order
to defame her in society filed a suit for restitution for conjugal rights, inter
alia, on the ground that marriage between them took place on 28th October, 2007.
It is an admitted position that there is no valid document evidencing marriage.
Nor is there any acceptable evidence of marriage. The Principal Judge, Family Court,
Meerut in his judgment and order dated 01.04.2008 has elaborately discussed the
facts. Since the facts have been very elaborately discussed in the judgment of the
Family Court, the same need not be repeated here. The Family Court came to a finding
that the attempt of the husband is to blackmail the appellant herein and the respondent
husband had already married Smt. Seema, D/o Shri Jeet Singh, R/o 263 Begum Bagh,
Meerut and a daughter was born in connection with the said marriage and was
studying in school. In the background of those facts the Principal Judge, Family
Court, Meerut held since there is no marriage there is no question of restitution.
The Family Court, therefore, dismissed the said petition with cost of Rs.2
lacs.
5.
From
the said judgment, an appeal was filed before the High Court in which the
Division Bench of the High Court has taken very peculiar stand in proceeding by
trying for conciliation. The High Court has noted that the appellant girl has categorically
denied the existence of marriage and the existence of joint account in a bank.
The High Court has not recorded anywhere about the validity of the marriage. Even
then the High Court strangely enough explored the possibility of a settlement between
the parties. The High Court without coming to any finding about the validity of
marriage and after recording that the validity of marriage was always denied by
the appellant gave certain directions which are wholly inconsistent with the facts
of the case. Since no marriage has been established, directions given by the High
Court are wholly inappropriate.
6.
Therefore,
the order of the High Court is set aside and we restore the judgment of the Family
Court with cost of Rs.2 lacs to be paid by the respondent within 3 months in favour
of Supreme Court Mediation Centre, New Delhi.
7.
The
appeal is thus allowed with costs of Rs.2 lacs as aforesaid.
.......................J.
(G.S. SINGHVI)
.......................J.
(ASOK KUMAR GANGULY
New
Delhi
July
04, 2011
Back
Pages: 1 2
