A suit for a declaration of the invalidity of a marriage is not a petition under the Hindu Marriage Act and therefore does not have to be filed in the District Court under section 19 of the Act.

( 1 ) IN the instant revisional application an important question of law has arisen for consideration of the Court, namely whether a suit, in which reliefs other than reliefs contemplated under the various provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act have been prayed for, is to be filed before the Court of the learned District Judge under the provisions of the section of the Hindu Marriage Act or before the Court of a learned Munsif.

( 2 ) THE present petitioner as plaintiff filed a suit being Title Suit No. 93 of 1982 in the Court of the learned Munsif at Chandannagar against the opposite party inter alia on the pleadings that the opposite party is not legally married wife of the plaintiff and the opposite party did not acquire the status of wife of the plaintiff. The sum and substance of the case made out by the plaintiff in his plaint is that the plaintiff who is a Hindu while reading M. A. in the University of Calcutta became acquainted with the defendant some time in the year 1967-68 and such acquaintance developed into love and intimacy and finally they got married on 24th April, 1981 in the house of the defendant's father at Singur according to the Hindu rites and after the marriage the parties resided together as husband and wife till 24th October, 1981. Subsequently the plaintiff came to know that the defendant opposite party is Christian by religion, a fact which was suppressed by defendant and her relatives before the marriage. Hence, the suit for declaration that the marriage is illegal, void and the defendant is not legally married wife of the plaintiff and she had not acquired the status of the wife and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from claiming anything on the basis of the said marriage.

( 3 ) THE defendant opposite party contested the suit by filing written statements denying all the material allegations in the plaint and specially allegation that it was not known to the plaintiff before the marriage that the defendant was Christian.

( 4 ) THE learned Munsif framed number of issues in the suit including the issue whether the learned Munsif has jurisdiction to try such a suit. The aforesaid issue relating to the jurisdiction was taken up by the learned Munsif as a preliminary issue and the learned Munsif after hearing both the parties on the said issue by order no. 28 dated 31. 10. 84 decided such issue against the plaintiff holding he had no jurisdiction to try the suit. By which said order the learned Munsif has also directed the return of the plaint for filing the same before the Court having jurisdiction to try such suit. The learned Munsif was of the view that plaintiff having prayed for declaration that the marriage between the parties void, the learned Massif has no jurisdiction to try such a suit and under section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Such a plaint is to be presented in the District Court.

( 5 ) ON appeal by the plaintiff against the said order the learned District Judge, Hooghly by his judgment and by his order dated 7th October, 1985 in Misc. Appeal No. 1 of 1985 has affirmed the order of the learned Munsif returning the plaint and has dismissed the appeal. 5a. Such order is under challenge under the present revisional application.

( 6 ) MR. Dilip Kr. Seth appearing for the petitioner in support of the revisional application has submitted inter alia that both Courts below have committed jurisdictional error by directing return of the plaint completely overlooking that the suit filed by the plaintiff was not at all a petition under the Hindu Marriage Act within the meaning of section 19 of the said Act as none of the reliefs which can be obtained under the said Act has been prayed for in the suit. He has further submitted inter alia that under section 19 of the said Act only a petition filed under the said Act is required to be prestated before the District Court and not otherwise. He has further contended inter alia that the suit filed by him is really