SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(Ker) 743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JJ.
D. Sivadasan – Appellant
Vs.
Santha – Respondent
Mat. Appeal No. 351 of 2006
Decided On : 16-06-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : K. Subash Chandra Bose, Adv.
For the Respondents: Leo George, Adv.

Headnote:Matrimonial Law - Limitation Act 1963, S. 29(3) – Relief outside the purview of the matrimonial laws under the statutes no such statement be conceivable and that is a common law remedy available which was organized into a right under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act as of the party wants an announcement that there was no marriage and no marriage was conducted and thereby the status of the wife or husband should not be given to any of the spouses.

JUDGMENT

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

1. The plaintiff in OS. No. 106/2005 on the file of the Family Court, Kottarakara is the appellant herein. The suit was filed by the appellant for a declaration that there is no legal and customary marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant and the defendant is not his wife. It is alleged in the plaint that the plaintiff and the defendant were neighbours and they fell in love and gradually developed carnal relationship. At the time when the love between them started, the plaintiff was employed in Navy and he got employment at the age of 19. On 4.4.1968, the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant came to the knowledge of the defendant's father and relatives and while they were in such relationship, the plaintiff was caught and manhandled by the defendant's father and her relatives. On account of the compulsion of the defendant's father and relatives, he agreed to marry the defendant. On the same day itself, he had taken the defendant to his house though his parents protested the same. When the plaintiff assured that he would marry her and take care of her, the defendant returned to her house. Thereafter he went to his workplace and came during August, 1968. On 12.8.1968 they executed a marriage registration agreement undertaking to live together as husband and wife. On that day itself, the defendant's father settled 73 cents of land in the joint names of the plaintiff and defendant. There was no valid marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant. At the time when the marriage agreement was executed, the plaintiff was aged 21 years and the defendant was aged 19 years. There was no customary marriage conducted by performing rituals prevailing among Thiyya community to which both of them belong. It was not registered with the SNDP Sakha of their locality. The marriage was not registered as per the Hindu Marriage Act as well. There was no exchange of rings or garlands and there was no tying of thali.

2. On 6.7.1969 the defendant gave birth to a female child by name Minimol. At the beginning of the relationship, the plaintiff did not take the defendant to his place of employment, when he came to understand some illegal relationship of the defendant, at the instance of her father, he had taken her to Visakhapatnam where he was working at that time and resided in a rental house. Thereafter he got transfer to Kochi. The second child Shine was born at Kochi on 9.4.1976. They resided together at Kochi till 1979. She was not acting as a dutiful wife or not caring for the words of the plaintiff and often going to her house without his consent. He tolerated all these things considering the welfare of the children. During 1979, he was transferred to Mumbai and he had taken the defendant and the children with him. While at Mumbai, he was affected by Epilepsy, treated in Navy Hospital and thereafter at Armed Force Medical College, Pune, and later diagnosed that Epilepsy developed due to Tuberculoma and he was discharged on medical grounds and transferred to Kochi during October 1980 and discharged from service during October 1981 with 40% disability pension. At the time of discharge, the children were studying at Central School, Kochi and they stayed in Kochi till the completion of the academic year of the children. During May, 1982, he settled at Shine Nivas in Velinallor village at Kottarakara taluk which is situated in 49 cents of property purchased by him with his funds. Till June 1983, they resided together and thereafter she deserted him and the children and started residing with one Karunakaran of Oolankunnil House, Karingannor. Thereafter they never resided together.

3. The building with 49 cents of land was purchased with his funds, but her name was also added. By spending huge amount, household articles were purchased. An amount of Rs. 11,000/- was spent for reclaiming 73 cents o


































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top