The appellant is challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Mangalore dated 16.9.2005 in M.C.No.75/2000. Respondent filed a petition under Secs.24 & 25 of the Special Marriage Act R/w Sec.18 of the Indian Divorce Act. According to the petition averments, petitioner and respondent are closely related. Mother of the petitioner and mother of the respondent are direct sisters and they agree to marry each other as per Christian rites and customs on 28.7.1987. Betrothal function was also held. On account of the difference of opinion arose between them, marriage could not be solemnized. As per the terms of the betrothal function, marriage should have been solemnized within six months from the date of engagement. Since marriage was not held within six months, engagement got cancelled and thereafter petitioner started living as a bachelor.

2. In the year 1994, petitioner met the respondent in a funeral ceremony of a relative Mr.Alphanso Pinto and after the funeral ceremony respondent informed the petitioner that still she is a spinster and requested the petitioner to forget all the differences and to give a life to her. Believing her request he married the respondent under the Special Marriage Act on 29.10.1994 before the Marriage Officer, Mangalore City and started living together at Bejai. Respondent was irritating the petitioner and started treating with utmost cruelty, she never used to cook food and was not taking care of his daily needs. Therefore, petitioner was compelled to being food from hotels and without any information respondent left matrimonial home within a month after the marriage. Later on, at the instance of the relatives and respectable persons of the community again marriage was solemnized on 11.1.1996 at Holy Church, Derebail. Again she started threatening the petitioner and she never cooked food for the petitioner.

3. According to him, it was not within his knowledge that respondent had married to one Latheef on 15.1.1988 and the said marriage was registered and that the respondent and the petitioner are coming under the prohibited degree of relationship, therefore the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was null and void on account of her earlier marriage subsisting as on the date of registration of the marriage and also on the ground that the parties comes within the prohibited degree. Petitioner immediately filed a petition in M.C.No.67/1996 and on account of his employment after filing M.C.67/1996 he went to Saudi Arabia. As he could not attend the case, he requested his counsel to withdraw the case. Accordingly case was withdrawn. When he returned to India in March, 1999 respondent started demanding a sum of Rs.1 lac. In the circumstances, it compelled the petitioner to file the petition granting divorce on the ground of nullity of marriage.

4. Respondent filed her objections admitting their relationship and also that they are the children of two direct sisters and she also admitted the betrothal function held on an earlier occasion and that the engagement was also cancelled. She also admitted that she met the petitioner in the funeral ceremony of Mr. Alphanso Pinto. However, she denied that she informed the petitioner that still she is a spinster and requested him to forget the differences and to give a life to her. She admit the registration of the marriage under the Special Marriage Act on 29.10.1994. She also admitted that husband and wife started living together at Bijai in Mangalore immediately after the marriage. She has denied the allegations of cruelty. It is also admitted by her that there was a marriage in accordance with the Christian rites on 11.1.1996 solemnized at Holy Church at Derabail. She denied that it was not known to the petitioner that respondent is the daughter of his mother’s sister. She denied that she had married to Latheef on 15.11.1988 and she has also denied that by suppressing the facts respondent h