, J.

1. This case has come to us on a reference made by the learned Judicial Commissioner of Chota Nagpur under Sec.17, Indian Divorce Act, The reference was heard by us on an earlier occasion, and by our order dated 21-12-1953, we directed the learned Judicial Commissioner to hold a further enquiry and take such additional evidence as the parties might adduce.

We further directed that the marriage certificate showing the solemnisation of the marriage between the parties should also be produced. In pursuance of the said order the learned Judicial Commissioner took further evidence and has submitted a further report to this Court.

2. There has been no appearance before us either on behalf of the petitioning husband or the respondent wife or the co-respondent. The learned Government pleader has placed the entire evidence before us and has given us great assistance by placing the relevant case law on the principal questions for determination in this case.

3. The facts are these. Stiphan Surin, the petitioning husband, alleged that he was married, to the respondent Piary Marki in the Lutheran Church at Latakel, Police Station Bano, in the district of Ranchi on 2-2-1951. The par