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

H.C.MISHRA, S.N.PATHAK
Sushil Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Indu Devi – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Naresh Prasad Thakur, Advocate

JUDGMENT (C.A.V.)

Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The appellant is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 27.09.2012, passed in MAT Case No. 36 of 2006/S.L. No. 79 of 2009, by Principal Judge (Family Court), Sahibganj whereby the suit preferred by the plaintiff under Section 24 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to get decree of declaration of marriage as null and void, has been dismissed.

3. The case of the plaintiff/appellant in brief is that his marriage was solemnised on 27.09.2002 with Indua Devi (defendant/respondent) at Maldah (West Bengal) under the provisions of Special Marriage Act, 1954 and a Marriage Certificate to this was issued by Special Marriage Officer, Maldah which is in possession of defendant/respondent. After their marriage both the parties started living together at village Lalban, P.S. Rajmahal, District - Sahibganj and was consummated. After few days of their marriage, the appellant came to know that respondent was earlier married to one Sri Ram Bilas, resident of village - Chakrafu Ekchari, P.S. Kahalgaon, District - Bhagalpur (Bihar) and out of said wedlock, she has a 13 years son who was studying at Mundli Mission School at Mundli, P































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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top