Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 1926
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LISA GILL, RITU TAGORE, JJ.
Lalit - Petitioner
Versus
Sadhna & Ors. - Respondents
CM No.18491-CII of 2022 in/and FAO No.5588 of 2022
Decided On : 04-01-2023
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 12(i)(c) and 14 - Appeal against dismissal of petition for annulment of marriage on grounds of fraud - The Family Court dismissed the petition limine for not meeting the statutory grounds for waiver of one-year waiting period - Important consideration on the merits of the petition was insufficiently addressed, particularly the opportunity for the petitioner to present a fresh application after the statutory period. (Paras 4-12)
(B) Statutory Mandates - The dismissal on merits without allowing the petitioner the opportunity to address the court adequately is deemed unwarranted, emphasizing the importance of proper judicial procedure before making decisions that significantly affect individual rights. (Paras 13-15)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a petition to annul the marriage claiming it was entered into under fraud regarding the identity of the bride and that no cohabitation had occurred. The Family Court dismissed the case for not providing exceptional circumstances for waiving the waiting period.
Findings of Court:
The Family Court's ruling was set aside, allowing the appellant to file a fresh petition post the statutory period.
Issues: Whether the dismissal on grounds of merits was justified despite the ability to file a future petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that procedural fairness must be observed, and dismissal without prejudice allows rights to pursue future claims without compromising the current judicial process.
Result: Order dated 10.08.2022 set aside to the extent of dismissal on merits; liberty granted to file a fresh petition.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay in re-filing of appeal condoned. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petition filed for annulment under fraud claims. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. family court's dismissal rationale evaluated. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. legal provisions for voidable marriages outlined. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. observations on merits dismissal necessary. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. order modification allows fresh petition post-one-year. (Para 15 , 16) |
JUDGMENT :
Lisa Gill, J.
CM-18491-CII-2022
2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, accompanied by an affidavit of learned counsel for the appellant as well as arguments addressed, delay of 27 days in re-filing of the appeal is condoned.
3. Application is disposed of, accordingly.
FAO-5588-2022
4. This appeal has been filed challenging order dated 10.08.2022 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gurugram, whereby appellant's petition under section 12(i)(c) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT (for short - 'the Act') has been dismissed in limine.
5. Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the matter are that the appellant-husband filed the petition under Section 12(i)(c) of the Act with pleadings that marriage of the appellant solemnised with respondent No.1 on 20.02.2022 was a nullity on the ground that appellant's consent had been obtained by fraud i.e. at the time of their engagement, the appellant had met a different girl but marriage was performed with another i.e. respondent No.1. It was further pleaded that no cohabitation took place between the parties and that respondent No.1 is residing with her parents since marriage on 20.02.2022.
6. As the petition was filed prior to expiry of one year from the marriage, an application was filed by the petitioner under Section 14 of the Act for waiving the statutory period of one year.
7. Learned Family Court dismissed the petition under Section 12(i)(c) of the Act filed by the petitioner in limine, while observing that marriage cannot be annulled just on the ground of appearance etc. of the respondent and furthermore it found no ground whatsoever to waive the statutory period of one year, as it did not find any case of exceptional hardship to the appellant or exceptional depravity on the part of the respondent.
8. Relevant part of order dated 10.08.2022 reads as under:-
"Further, the entire petition revolves around the looks of respondent. As per Indian Society, every girl gives a better appearance at the time of negotiation but it does not mean that all marriages should be annulled just on the ground of appearance. Further Section 14 of HMA begins with the words 'notwithstanding' meaning thereby it is a 'non-obstante' clause, that imposes an embargo upon the court to exercise discretionary power. Though a proviso has been attached with the Section gives some authority to the Court to waive the statutory time that too in case of 'exceptional hardship' to the petitioner or of exceptional depravity on the part of the respondent. But none of the grounds have been fulfilled by the petitioner during presenting the present petition which may enable the Court to presume that petitioner has been caused with such a grave depravity. Therefore, the grounds mentioned in Section 14 of HMA falls short to come within the purview of proviso clause and hence the application under Section 14 of HMA is dismissed. Therefore, the petition is also dismissed being rot maintainable. File be consigned to record room after due compliance." (emphasis added)
9. Learned counsel for the appellant argues that the learned Family Court has grossly erred in firstly not waiving the statutory period of one year and furthermore by proceeding to dismiss the petition under Section 12(i)(c) of the Act on merits as well. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that such perfunctory and summary dismissal of the petition filed by the appellant on merits, is not justified and has dealt grave injustice to the appellant. It is, thus, prayed that this appeal be allowed.
10. Heard learned counsel for the appellant
