A Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction to declare marital status under the Family Courts Act, rendering such suits filed in civil courts non-maintainable.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Jain, J.

1. The instant appeal under Section 96 C.P.C. has been filed by the plaintiff-appellant Smt. Varsha Sharma @ Suman against the judgment and decree dated 17.09.2022 passed by the court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Gautam Budh Nagar in O.S. No.668 of 2015, Smt. Varsha Sharma @ Suman Vs. Ajay Sharma & others, whereby the plaintiff's suit for declaration that she is the second legal wife of late Mukesh Sharma, has been dismissed by the trial court on the ground that the suit is not maintainable because the plaintiff is seeking declaration of her matrimonial status, which can only be granted by a Family court, constituted under the FAMILY COURTS ACT , 1984.

2. Brief factual matrix is that the plaintiff-appellant filed a suit with the averments that her husband Mukesh Sharma was earlier married to a woman named Rekha, and from that wedlock, the defendants were born. Thereafter, Smt. Rekha died, after which the plaintiff-appellant and Mukesh Sharma willingly solemnized marriage, according to Hindu rites and rituals on 12.03.2011 and thereafter, lived together. No child was born from this wedlock. Unfortunately, her husband Mukesh Sharma expired on 21.03.2014, leaving behind movable and immovable property of approximately Rs.30 crores in which, she and the defendants had equal 1/3rd share. It is the case of the plaintiff that in order to usurp the property of her late husband, the defendants has refused to accept her as the legal wife of Mukesh Sharma. The plaintiff further averred that during her lifetime, Mukesh Sharma had acknowledged her to be his legal wife and had accordingly, opened joint bank accounts in different banks, in which defendant No.1 Ajay Sharma was also made nominee.

3. It was further submitted that in Aadhaar card and other documents, she was shown to be the legally wedded wife of Mukesh Sharma. The plaintiff submitted that since, the heirs of late Mukesh Sharma have refused to accept her as the legally wedded wife of the deceased, as such, there is no other alternative, but to seek declaration from this Court regarding her matrimonial status. With these submissions, it was prayed that:-

(i) By a decree of declaration granted in favour of the plaintiff, against the defendants, she be declared the second legal wife of late Mukesh Sharma;

(ii) The cost of the suit be also awarded to the plaintiff against the defendants;

(iii) Any other relief, which the Court, deems fit and appropriate may also be granted to the plaintiff, against the defendants.

4. The defendant No.1 Ajay Sharma filed his written statement in the trial court, in which he denied the plaint allegations and submitted that the plaintiff is a fraudulent woman, who worked as a maid in his house situated in Baraula, for which she was paid salary. The plaintiff has not filed any documents to prove that she is the legally wedded wife of late Mukesh Sharma. The plaintiff wants to usurp the movable and immovable property of the deceased, who is not the legally wedded wife of his father. It was further averred that he has lodged several criminal cases against the plaintiff. The plaintiff has forged and fabricated several documents. The plaintiff never remained the legally wedded wife of his father. With these submissions, it was prayed that the suit be dismissed with special cost.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the trial court framed the following issues:-

(i) Whether the plaintiff is the legal wife of late Mukesh Sharma, after the death of his first wife Rekha Sharma?

(ii) Whether the suit is not maintainable?

(iii) Whether the suit is undervalued?

(iv) Whether the court fees paid is insufficient?

(v) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get any other relief?

6. In the trial court, the plaintiff examined Varsha Sharma as PW-1 and Pramod Kumar as PW-2 and the defendant No.1 Ajay Sharma was examined as DW-1 and Om Prakash as DW-2. Besides the above oral evidence, documentary evidence in the form of photo copies of PAN card, Fa