High Courts(2001) 07 P&H CK 0002

Sunita vs Jugal Kishore

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 30 July 2001 · Citation: (2005) 1 HLR 82 : (2005) 1 PLR 592 : (2004) 4 RCR(Civil) 784

HON’BLE JUDGES
Adarsh Kumar Goel, J
CASE NUMBER
First Appeal from the Order No. 141-M of 1995

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

18 paragraphs · 340 words

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.—This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Yamunanagar,

dated 11.8.1995 declaring the marriage to the nullity.

2.

Marriage between the parties took place on 5.6.1993 and the petition giving rise to this appeal was filed on 1.9.1993 stating that the first

marriage of the respondenthusband was dissolved on 16.4.1993 and he married the appellantwife on a representation that the previous marriage of

the appellantwife stood dissolved by a decree of divorce but later on it was learnt that the previous marriage had not been dissolved. The

appellantwife stated that her previous marriage itself was a nullity as the previous husband in the second marriage was already married and she had

taken divorce from her first husband.

3.

The trial Court found that the appellantwife was unable to prove the divorce from the first marriage and, therefore, marriage with the respondent

husband was a nullity.

4.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, I do not find any error in the approach adopted by the trial Court. The appellantwife was

earlier married to one Ram Bhushan and the said marriage is not shown to have been dissolved. As regards her second marriage, even if it is

assumed that her second husband was already married and, therefore, she was not required to obtain divorce, she was ineligible to marry the

respondenthusband. I, therefore, affirm the finding of the trial Court on this aspect.

5.

However, I find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the respondenthusband having married the appellantwife

without any misrepresentation or fraud by her, could not file a petition for annulling the marriage as it would amount to taking advantage of his own

wrong. In view of this submission, I find that the decree granted by the trial Court cannot be sustained.

6.

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed and the decree granted by the trial Court is set aside and the petition for nullity of marriage filed by the

respondenthusband is dismissed.