High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : K.K. Acharya
Mst.Shabnam - Appellant
Versus
Mohd.Shafiq - Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 539 of 1996
Decided On : 05/19/2004
Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act - Marriage - Section 2(vii) of Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 - 2
Fact of the Case:
Plaintiff filed a suit for dissolution of marriage under Section 2(vii) of Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 on the ground that she was married before the age of 15 and repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of 18. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the appellate court found in favor of the plaintiff, granting the dissolution of marriage.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the plaintiff had established her date of birth as 15-3-1978, making her a minor at the time of marriage. It also found that the marriage was not consummated after the plaintiff attained puberty, satisfying the essential ingredients for dissolution of marriage under Section 2(vii) of the Act.
Issues: The issues involved were the plaintiff's age at the time of marriage and whether the marriage was consummated after she attained puberty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, which allows a woman married before the age of 15 to repudiate the marriage before attaining the age of 18, provided the marriage has not been consummated. The court also emphasized the importance of establishing the date of birth and the lack of consummation after puberty.
Final Decision: The appellate court allowed the appeal, quashed the trial court's order, and decreed the dissolution of marriage in favor of the plaintiff.
N.N. Mathur, J.-This is plaintiffs appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against the judgment dated 27-7-1996 whereby the Judge. Family Court, Jodhpur dismissed the appellant’s petition for dissolution of marriage.
2. The facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that appellant filed a suit for dissolution other marriage under Section 2(vii) of Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 on the ground that she was being married by her father before she attained the age of 15 years which was repudiated by her before attaining the age of eighteen years. She was aged 14 years at the time of Nikah on 2-11-199 1 performed through her father with Mohd. Shafiq. She disclosed her date of birth as 15-3-1978. It was further averred that marriage of the plaintiff was never consummated with defendant. She also claimed dowry as mentioned in Schedule ‘A’,
3. The plaint allegations were controverted by filing a written statement. In the written statement. It was admitted that Nikah between the parties took place on 2-11-1991 but it was denied that plaintiff Shabnam was 14 years of age at the time of Nikah. It was stated that at the time of Nikah. Shahar Qazi Shri Abid Ali filled in the pro forma the age of plaintiff as 16 years. But, thereafter the father of the plaintiff with a view to file a suit, filed a false affidavit before the District Education Officer and could manage the change in date of birth. It was further averred that age of plaintiff in the school register of St. Dom Basco School, Jodhpur was 15-3-1975. It was also stated that in the school register of Kasturba Gandhi School, where the plaintiff was student of 2nd K, G., her date of birth was shows as 15-3-1975. It was further averred that in the Government Girls’ Senior Higher Secondary School, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, the original date of birth of plaintiff was recorded as 15-3-1975, but, after the orders of District Education Department, it was amended as 15-3-19.78. This shows that age of plaintiff at the time of Nikah was 16 years i.e. 2-11 -1991. It was further -averred that in the ration card, father of the plaintiff mentioned her age as 16 years. It was also stated that age of younger brother of plaintiff was (sic) inserted as 11-11-1976 in the school records. It was further averred that after the marriage, plaintiff came to her in-laws house and consummated the marriage for two days and third day she returned to her parent’s house. Thereafter, she again visited her matrimonial home in the summer vacation and consummated the marriage. Defendant denied to have received notice to repudiate, the marriage. With regard to Schedule ‘A’, it was submitted that plaintiff had already taken all the articles, therefore, she was in the possession of them. It was further averred that defendant has filed a petition for restoration of conjugal rights which was pending before the Bikaner Court. The plaintiff filed a rejoinder and denied that her date of birth was 15-3-1975 but it was re-emphasized that her date of birth was 15-3-1978. It was further averred that date of birth of Mohd. Afroz was 17-5-1980. In the rejoinder, she reiterated that she never consummated marriage with defendant.
4. Onthe basis of material controversy, trial Court framed the following issues :
1. Whether the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized before she attained 15 years of age and she repudiated the same before attaining her 18 years of age?
2. Whether the petitioner ever discharged her conjugal duties after her marriage?
3: Whether the petitioner is entitled to get articles mentioned in the annexed Schedule?
4. Whether the petitioner has already received the articles mentioned in the enclosed Schedule?
5. Relief ?”
5. Plaintiff examined herself as PW-land her father Mohd. Ismail as PW-2. Defendant examined himself as NAW-1. Qazi Mohd. Ayub as NAW-2, Salsari Samyan as NAW-3, Om Prakash as NAW-4. Surajmal Pal as NAW-5, Anil Kumar as NAW-6, Shahar Qazi Adique All as NAW-7, Mahajabin as NA
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.