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

2022 Supreme(Raj) 861

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SANDEEP MEHTA, KULDEEP MATHUR, JJ.
Bhagwat Singh @ Bhagwan Singh S/o Lal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Khushboo Kanwar @ Manju Kanwar W/o Bhagwat Singh @ Bhagwan Singh – Respondent
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1196 of 2022
Decided On : 29-11-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Rajesh Choudhary.
For the Respondent: S.S. Rathore.

Jurisdiction of the Family Court to entertain applications under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is determined by the provisions of Section 19 (iiia) of the Act.

Headnote:

Family Courts Act - Jurisdiction - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 11, 19 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 11 and 19 (iiia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and their interpretation in relation to the jurisdiction of the Family Court. The court held that the Family Court at Balotra does not have jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking declaration of the second marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent No. 2 as void. The appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Family Court at Balotra to adjudicate the dispute.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the cause of action did not arise in favor of the respondent No. 1 in the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court, Balotra. It held that the marriage between the appellant and respondent No. 2 could not have been declared void at the instance of respondent No. 1. The court also mentioned that respondent No. 1 could seek declaration under the provisions of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act.

Issues: Jurisdiction of the Family Court to entertain the application filed under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the provisions of Section 11 and 19 (iiia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the finding that the cause of action did not arise in the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court, Balotra.

Final Decision: The court quashed and set aside the impugned order passed by the Family Court, Balotra and held that the Family Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by respondent No. 1 under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The appellant's application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present misc. appeal has been preferred by appellant-husband under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 for assailing the order dated 31.05.2022 passed by the learned Family Court, Balotra in Civil Original (Family Dispute) Case No. 67/2021 (CIS No. 68/2021) Khushboo Kanwar @ Manju Kanwar vs. Bhagwat Singh @ Bhagwan Singh. The learned Family Court by the aforesaid order dated 31.05.2022 dismissed application filed by appellant-husband under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC with a prayer to reject the application submitted by respondent-wife under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1955’) seeking declaration of the second marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent No. 2 i.e. Smt. Devyani Solanki void on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.

2. The respondent No. 1 filed an application under Section 11 of the Act of 1955 before Family Court, Balotra alleging inter-alia that she is the legally wedded wife of the appellant-Bhagwat Singh. However, during her lifetime, appellant-husband has entered into a second marriage with respondent No. 2. To substantiate the aforesaid allegation, a marriage registration certificate bearing No. 08122001000000100444/2021 dated 14.06.2021, issued by competent authority at Bhilwara was annexed with the application. It was thus prayed that the second marriage of appellant may therefore be declared null and void and the same may be annuled.

3. For ready reference, the prayer made by respondent No. 1 in the application filed under Section 11 of the Act of 1955 before Family Court, Balotra reads as under:

^^13- vr% ÁkFkhZ;k dh ÁkFkZuk gSa fd%&

¼v½ fd foÁkFkhZ la[;k 1 dk foÁkFkhZ la[;k 2 ds lkFk ÁkFkhZ;k ds thoudky esa gq;s f}rh; fookg fnukad 22-02-2021 o fookg iath;u jftLVªhdj.k la[;k 08122001000000100444@2021 jftLVªhdj.k dh fnukad 14-06-2021] tkjh dh rkjh[k 05-07-2021 dks voS/k o 'kwU; ?kksf"kr dj mDr fookg dks [kf.Mr ?kksf"kr fd;k tkdj jn~n o fujLr djkos] bl vk'k; dh fMØh ÁkFkhZ;k ds i{k esa o foÁkFkhZx.k ds fo:} tkjh djkosA

¼c½ fd vU; vuqrks"k tks cgd ÁkFkhZ;k dks fnjkosA

bfr fnukad 20-10-2021A**

4. Upon service of summons, the appellant appeared before Family Court and submitted an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC stating that the marriage registration certificate bearing No. No. 08122001000000100444/2021 which has been sought to be declared null and void was issued by the competent authority at Bhilwara therefore, the Family Court at Balotra does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute.

5. The learned Family Court, Balotra after hearing both the parties, rejected the application filed by the appellant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC by the impugned order dated 31.05.2022 on the ground that the application under Section 11 filed by respondent No. 1 seeking the marriage between appellant and respondent No. 2 to be null and void has been preferred by the respondent No. 1, while she is residing in the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court, Balotra thus, as per the provisions of Section 19 (iiia) of the Act of 1955, the application is maintainable. The said order is assailed in the appeal.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. Section 11 and 19 (iiia) is reproduced herein below for the sake of ready reference:

“11. Void marriages - Any marriage solemnised after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto [against the other party] be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of section 5.

19. Court to which petition shall be presented - Every petition under this Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction:

(i) the marriage was solemnized.

(ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides.

(iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together.

(iii

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top