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

1982 Supreme(All) 124

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Deoki Nandan, J.
SMT.KIRAN BALA ASTHANA - Appellant
Versus
BHAIRE PRASAD SRIVASTAVA - Respondents
First Appeal 349 Of 1979
Decided On : 02/08/1982

Advocates Appeared:
D.P.BHATT, TRIVENI SHANKAR

1. Fraud in obtaining consent can render a Hindu marriage voidable under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, even if the consent was not expressly asked for or given. 2. Mental disorder arising subsequent to the marriage can be a ground for divorce under Section 13 (1) (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Headnote:

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT - SECTION 12 (1) (C) - NULLITY OF MARRIAGE - CONSENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD - MENTAL DISORDER - SECTION 13 (1) (III) - INCURABLY OF UNSOUND MIND - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant wife challenged a decree of divorce granted to the respondent husband on the ground of incurable unsoundness of mind under Section 13 (1) (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The trial court also found that the husband's consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud, as he was not informed about the appellant's previous marriage being annulled due to her unsound mind.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondent husband's consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud, as he was not informed about the appellant's previous marriage being annulled due to her unsound mind. The court also found that the appellant was suffering from schizophrenia, a mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the respondent husband could not reasonably be expected to live with her.

Issues: 1. Whether the marriage between the parties was voidable due to fraud in obtaining consent under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act? 2. Whether the appellant was incurably of unsound mind or suffering from a mental disorder under Section 13 (1) (iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the marriage was voidable due to fraud, as the respondent husband's consent was obtained by concealing the fact of the appellant's previous marriage being annulled due to her unsound mind. The court interpreted Section 12 (1) (c) to include cases where the consent of a party was obtained by fraud, even if it was not expressly asked for or given. 2. The court held that the appellant was suffering from schizophrenia, a mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the respondent husband could not reasonably be expected to live with her. The court interpreted Section 13 (1) (iii) to include cases where the mental disorder arose subsequent to the marriage.

Final Decision: The court annulled the marriage between the parties under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of fraud in obtaining consent. The court deemed the appeal dismissed, although the decree appealed from was modified completely.

DEOKI NANDAN, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a wifes first appeal from a decree dissolving her marriage with the respondent husband by a decree of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground that the appellant has been incurably of unsound mind within the meaning of Clause (iii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Act.

( 2 ) THE respondent husband was the petitioner in the court below. He had claimed the relief of declaration that the marriage between the parties was null and void and had claimed the relief of dissolution of the marriage in the alternative. The trial court has also recorded the finding that the consent of the husband to the marriage was obtained by fraud, inasmuch as he was not apprised of the fact that a former marriage of the appellant had been declared to be a nullity on the ground that the appellant was of unsound mind at the time of that marriage. Indeed, on that finding, the respondent husband was entitled to an annulment of the marriage by a decree of nullity under Section 12 (1) (c) rather than a dissolution of the marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 (i) (iii) of the Act.

( 3 ) AT the outset of the hearing in this Court, it was suggested before me that the appellant was not of unsound mind and it was impossible to say that she was incurably of unsound mind and an application was made on her behalf for medical examination. On a consideration of the material placed before me at that time, I referred the appellants case to the Lucknow Medical College by my order dated the 18th Jan. 1980 for examination and observation and a report on the following points :-

(i) Whether the appellant has been incurably of unsound mind? (ii) Whether she has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder which means mental illness, arrest or incomplete development of mind, psychopathic disorder or any other disorder or disability of mind which includes schizophrenia, or from psychopathic disorder which means a persistent disorder or disability of mind (whether or not including subnormality of intelligence) which results in abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct on her part; and whether or not it requires or is susceptible to medical treatment?

( 4 ) ONE Dr. Prabhat Sitholey, acting for Dr. J. K. Trivedi, Lecturer in Psychiatry, in the Medical college, Lucknow, thereupon made a report, which was forwarded to this Court with a letter dated the 16th July, 1980, by the Principal of that College. The penultimate opinion expressed in that report reads as under:-

"overall, she does not seem to have any mental disorder which may result in abnormally agressive or seriously irresponsible conduct on her part. She is suffering from a mild neurotic depression which requires and is susceptible to medical treatment (this may include a change in her circumstances)".


( 5 ) ON receiving this report, the attempt to bring about a reconciliation between the parties was renewed, and, on my persuasion, it was agreed between the parties, and I directed, that the appellant shall get herself treated at the Lucknow Medical College and obtain and submit a report of her mental condition after three months. I further directed that it shall be open to the respondent husband to look after the appellants treatment to the best of his ability and inclination in order to assure himself that the appellants disease is in fact curable and cured, or otherwise. Ultimately, on the 16th December, 1980, with the good offices of Mr. S. N. Verma, the learned counsel for the respondent husband, he agreed to take the appellant back with him as a measure of trial in order to make sure that the appellant is free from the mental disorder complained of. The appellant was also willing to go with the respondent. That seemed to me to be the best course to be adopted for bringing about a reconciliation and settlement between the parties and I accordingly directed that without prejudice to the rights of the parties in this appeal, the a













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