JUDGMENT

A. S. NAIDU, J. — This appeal is preferred under Sec. 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act by the unsuccessful defendant wife (appellant in the present appeal) being aggrieved by the judgment dated October, 5, 1996 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No. 186 of 1991.

2. Dillip Kumar Patnaik, the plaintiff-husband, (respond¬ent in the present appeal) filed Civil Proceeding No. 186 of 1991 praying, inter alia, for a declaration that the document styled as “Bibaha Bandhan Agreement” bearing Registration No. 703 dated 24.11.1996 registered before the Sub-Registrar, Cuttack is a fraud¬ulent and fabricated one and that he had never married the de¬fendant-wife, Namita Mohanty and the latter is not his married wife as well as for other consequential reliefs.

3. The short facts which are necessary for appreciating the case are as follows :

The plaintiff-husband is an employee of the Postal Depart¬ment and at the relevant time (1986) was posted at Athagarh. The fathers of both the parties were serving in the Postal Department and belong to the same village. Thus, the plaintiff-husband and defendant knew each other for quite some time. The plaintiff was also ve