V.K. Tahilramani, J.

The appellant/original petitioner-wife has preferred this appeal against the order dated 18/4/2013 passed in Family Court Petition No. 2877 of 2011.

2. In brief the facts leading to filing of the appeal are summarized as under:

(i) The appellant/original petitioner-wife had filed the petition seeking decree of nullity of marriage and alternatively claimed the decree of divorce. In nutshell, the appellant had approached with the case that on 13/1/1999, she was married to respondent as per Hindu rites and rituals. At the time of marriage the appellant was Hindu and respondent was Christian. After the marriage they continued to profess their respective religion. At the time of filing of the petition also they continue to practice and follow their respective religion.

(ii) The appellant had filed petition u/s 11 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955, seeking decree of nullity on the ground that their marriage was null and void as same being in contravention of essential condition of valid marriage provided u/s 5 of Hindu Marriage Act. By way of alternate relief, the appellant had claimed decree of divorce u/s 13(1)(i-a) of Hindu Marriage Act, on the ground of cruelty. Since the learned Judge of Family Court has rejected the petition of the appellant in exercise of powers under Order VII Rule 11 of Civil Procedure Code, it is not necessary for us to state in detail the facts pleaded in the petition as well as the case of the respondent.

(iii) In view of the fact that respondent i.e. the husband has admitted the fact that at the time of the marriage and since thereafter he continued to be Christian though their marriage was performed as per Hindu rights and rituals the appellant had taken out the application under Order XII Rule 6 of CPC seeking decree of nullity of marriage on the ground of admission given by the respondent. The learned Judge of the Family Court on consideration of the application taken out by the petitioner-appellant and the pleadings on record, reached to prima facie conclusion that the petition discloses no cause of action which needs to be adjudicated by the court and issued notice to appellant to show cause as to why the petition shall not be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11(a) & (d) of CPC.

(iv) Although the petitioner-appellant has not filed say to the notice issued by the learned Judge of the Family Court, but filed written arguments. The learned Judge of the Family Court, after hearing the parties and considering the facts pleaded in the petition that at the time of marriage the petitioner-wife was Hindu by religion and respondent-husband was Christian and continued to practice and profess their respective religion, rejected the petition in exercise of powers under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. as the petition discloses no triable cause of action. Being aggrieved by the order of rejection of petition, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

3. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the appellant as well as the respondent. After carefully scrutinizing the impugned order in the light of the pleadings of the parties and the relevant provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for the reasons mentioned herein above, we are of the view that the order impugned by way of this appeal is perfectly legal and calls for no interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction, by this court.

4. The appellant is seeking decree of nullity of marriage under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act reads thus:-

11. Void marriages:- Any marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto [against the other party], be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes anyone of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5.

Section 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act clearly states that the petition can be filed by the parties who are both Hindus. Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act