The apostasy of a wife under the Mohamedan Law brings about a dissolution of the marriage, and the wife is entitled to the entirety of the dower amount if the marriage had been consummated.

SATYANARAYANA RAJA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal against a Decree of the Second Additional fudge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for the payment of Rs. 25,000 (H. S.) bv the appellant to the respondent as the amount of dower alleged to have been agreed upon when they were married on 18th May, 1950.

( 2 ) THE facts which are material for the purpose of appreciating the matters in controversy and the points arising for decision may be briefly mentioned. The partied were Sunni Mohamedans. At their marriage, the appellant, in accordance with the usual practice and custom, executed a Siaha (marriage certificate), which is exhibit P-15 in the case, agreeing inter alia to pay the respondent a deferred dower rs 25,000 (H. S.) with 5 gold deenars. The respondent alleged that she was divorced by the appellant on 9th September, 1950. This fact, was, however, denied by the appellant. The respondent became a convert to Hinduism on 12th october, 1950. On that date, she married one Amar Kumar. On ist November, 1950, the appellant filed a suit, No. 115/1 of 1950 on the file of Atraf Balda, Hyderabad, which was subsequently transferred to the Court of the District and Sessions Judge, hyderabad, and there re-numbered as Case No. 92/1 of 1951, for restitution of conjugal rights. The present respondent there raised the plea that the appellant had divorced her. It was alternatively contended that the respondent had become a convert to arya Samaj Vedic Dharma, which brought about a dissolution of the marriage.

( 3 ) ON 20th July, 1952, the suit filed by the present appellant was dismissed on the ground that the respondent became a convert to Hinduism. Against the said decree, the appellant preferred an appeal to the High Court of Hyderabad, in a. S. No. 61/1 of 1952. The appeal was eventually dismissed, as withdrawn, on 11th February, 1957. The respondent instituted the present suit on 8th September, 1953, in the District Court, Hyderabad, in forma pauperis, for recovery of her dowiy valued at Rs. 9,247-8-6 and her dower of Rs. 25,000 (H. S.) together with five gold deenars. The following material issues framed by the trial Court reflect the matters on which the parties were at controversy : issue 4.-" What is the effect of change of religion oil the claim of the plaintiff ? " issue 5.-"what is the effect of withdrawal of the appeal by the defendant against the suit no. 92/1 of 1951 on the present ? " issue 7.-"whether plaintiff, by apostatizing and renouncing Islam of her own will, can claim dower from the defendant ?"

( 4 ) THE trial Judge held that the effect of the withdrawal of the appeal by the defendant against the judgment in the suit which he had filed for restitution of conjugal rights, was that the judgment operated as res judicata. It was held that the apostasy of the respondent had brought about the dissolution of the marriage. The lower Court also held that inasmuch as the respondent apostatized after the consummation of the marriage, she was entitled to the entirety of the dower amount of Rs. 25,000 (H. S. ). As a result of the findings reached by him, the learned trial judge granted a decree in favour of the respondent for the sum of Rs. 25,000 (H. S. ). The respondent s claim for dowry and the five deenars was negatived. She has not, however, preferred any appeal against that part of the decree of the lower court.

( 5 ) IN this appeal preferred by the defendant, a number of contentions have been raised. The main contentions may be summarised as follows : under the Mohamedan Law, the apostasy of the wife cannot bring about a dissolution of the marriage. The finding of the Court in the earlier litigation that the marriage became dissolved by reason of the apostasy of the wife does not operate as res judicata. The respondent is not entitled to claim deferred dower which is claimable only in the event of the death of either of the parties or on divorce. The apostasy of the respondent, even if true, did not bring about a dissolution of the m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document