( 1 ) VERY interesting question of law is raised in this appeal.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, it is necessary to narrate few facts.

( 3 ) THE appellants herein were the original defendants in O. S. No. 1332 of 1994, which was filed by the plaintiff in the Court of the V Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The plaintiff filed the suit for relief of declaration that the plaintiff has got a legal right to perform all ceremonies in connection with the marriages of Defendants 4 and 5 in accordance with the custom and religious rites prevailing in the plaintiff s family and that for relief of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants 1 to 3 from performing any ceremonies in connection with the marriages of Defendants 4 and 5.

( 4 ) IT is further averred by the plaintiff that the plaintiff and the first defendant are the husband and wife. Defendants 2 and 3 are the parents of Defendant No. 1. Defendants 4 and 5 are the daughters of the plaintiff

( 5 ) IT is the further case of the plaintiff that his relations with his wife were strained and therefore he filed O. P. No. 67 of 1990 against the first defendant herein for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The same is pending on the file of the First Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The first defendant is totally under the influence of her parents i. e. , Defendants 2 and 3 herein. They were bent upon to disgrace the plaintiff in the Society. The first defendant is acting against the interest of their children.

( 6 ) IT is the case of the plaintiff that he belongs to Agarwal Community. It is the custom in the Agarvval Community lhal the marriages of Agarwal Community girls are celebrated at the early age and therefore the plaintiff wanted to perform the marriages of his daughters i. e. . , Defendants 4 and 5 as per the customary rites and ceremonies.

( 7 ) IT is the further case of the plaintiff that it is the family custom to perform the marriages of their children as per "ram Snehi Sampradha". The plaintiff is a religious person and he wants to observe all the customary riles prevailing in his family. In order to defeat the rights of the plaintiff, Defendants 1 to 3 selected a bridegroom for Defendant No. 4 without the plaintiffs consent. It is further averred by the plaintiff that it is the primary duty of the family to give the girl in marriage. The right is vested only in the father. It cannot be performed by any one.

( 8 ) IT is the further case of the plaintiff that he is fully competent and capable of discharging his moral and religious riles. The Defendants 1 to 3 denied the plaintifls s right and they want to perform the ceremonies of the marriage of 4th Defendant in accordance with their custom. It is further alleged by the plaintiff that as per the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, the marriage to be held valid when it is performed only in accordance with the customs prevailing in the family. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff filed the present suit against the defendants with a prayer that his rights in performing the marriages of Defendants 4 and 5 as per prevailing customary rites in his family including kanyadhan cannot be interfered with by the Defendants 1 to 3 and declaration to that effect was sought by the plaintiff!

( 9 ) DEFENDANTS 1 to 4 on appearance filed written statement on the ground that the first defendant is no more wife of the plaintiff as O. P. No. 67 of 1990 filed by the plaintiff herein is allowed. The plaintiff never took any interest in the welfare of his children. He cannot impose any ancient out-moded customary rites and ceremonies of the plaintiff s family on Defendant No. 4. There are no differences between customary riles and ceremonies of the plaintiff s family and the family of Defendants 2 and 3. In order to wreck vengeance on Defendants 1 to 3 and to harass 4th defendant, the plainli ff filed the present suit.

( 10 ) IT is the further case