Conversion of one spouse to another religion does not ipso facto dissolve the marriage.

( 1 ) THE revision petitioner herein laid the suit 0 S No 217/79 on the file of District Munsif s Court, Giddalur for a declaration that after he got himself converted to Islam from Hinduism on 13-10-1978, he ceased to be the husband of his wife, the defendant-respondent herein.

( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner was that the petitioner and the respondent herein were Hindus at the time of their marriage and their marriage was performed according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies at Tirumala in Chittoor district on 8-7-1976 Thereafter, while he was working at Cumbam the petitioner voluntarily embraced Islam on 13-10-1978 and changed his name from Nare Vijaya kumar Reddv as Mohammed Zulfiquar aii he continued to lead his life in accordance with Islamic traditions and principles and inspite of his best efforts to get the respondent also into the Islamic fold, the respondent turned down his officer Hence he has filed the suit for declaration that he is not the husband of the defendant and that his marriage with the defendant stood dissolved the moment he renounced his religion of his birth i. e , Hinduism.

( 3 ) THE defendant-respondent here in denied the allegation in the plaint and contended inter alia that the petitioner and the defendant at the time of the marriage were Hindus, that their marriage was performed according to hindu rites and ceremonies at Tirumala, on 8-7-1976, that the conversion of a hindu to Islam will not automatically dissolve the marriage and that the petitioner cannot take advantage of his own wrong, that he is not entitled for a decree for declaration that he ceased to be the husband of the respondent herein from the date of his conversion on 13-10-1978 and that the marriage stood dissolved the moment he renounced Hinduism, the religion of his birth.

( 4 ) THE legal objection raised by the respondent herein was tried as a preliminary issue at the instance both the parties advancing legal arguments and without adducing any evidence. Both the Courts below held that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain a suit for declaration that the petitioner ceased to be the husband of the defendant-respondent herein the moment he got himself converted to Islam on 13-10-1978 and that further declaration that the marriage between the petitioner and the defendant stood dissolved the moment the plaintiff renounced the religion of his birth and embraced Islam on 13-10-1978. Hence, the plaintiff s suit before the trial Court and the appeal before the lower appellate court were dismissed.

( 5 ) IN this appeal, the only contention urged by Sri Mirza Munawwar ali Baig, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner is that both the Courts erred in law in holding that they have no jurisdiction to try and pass a declaratory decree as prayed for in the petition.

( 6 ) IT is not in dispute that both the petitioner and the. respondent herein were hindus at the time of their marriage and their marriage was performed according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Tirumala on 8-7-1976 and it is only 13-10-1978 the petitioner herein alleged to have embraced Islam.

( 7 ) THE contention of the petitioner is that the moment he embraced islam he ceases to a Hindu hence he ceases to be the husband of the defendant respondent herein and as such he is entitled for a declaration that the marriage between the parties which took place according to Hindu rites and ceremonies on 8-7-1976 stood dissolved with effect from 13-10-1978.

( 8 ) IN support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon a decision in John Jiban chandra Dutta vs. Abinash Chandra Sen (1) Indian Cases Vol. 183 (1939) Cal. 75.

( 9 ) THAT was a case where, a man named Dukhiram, an Indian Christian, married an Indian Christian woman named sudakhina. He was subsequently converted to Muhammadanism and contracted a marriage with a Mohammadan woman named Alfatannessa. The question in that decision was whether an Indian Christian who becomes convert