HARISH TANDON
Kala Raman – Appellant
Versus
Ravi Ranganathan – Respondent
Harish Tandon, J.
1. At this stage of Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code, the suit is sought to be nipped in the bud as the plaint does not disclose the cause of action. The plaintiff/opposite party seeks a relief annulling the marriage between the parties to be void on the grounds of concealment of material facts, which constitutes fraud.
2. Admittedly the marriage between the parties was solemnized in accordance with Hindu Ritual and Rites on May 12, 2013 at Guruvayur in the State of Kerala. It is certainly not a chosen marriage where the parties have fallen in love and decided to marry but a negotiating one through the social contracts. Both the parties and their family members were interacting and in fact, have met personally exchanging their views and aspirations in the life and ultimately agreed to marry. During the marriage ceremony, the plaintiff/opposite party experienced the smell of foul breath coming from the mouth of the petitioner which was explained being due to improper bowl movements as a result of anxiety. The petitioner was taken to the doctors and was opined to suffer from Chronic Periodontitis. According to the opposite party, even during the honeymoon, the co
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.