JUDGMENT

Amit Rawal, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.03.2023 rendered in O.P.No.1130/2021 whereby claim of the appellant/husband for declaration and compensation in respect of the marriage contracted on 22.12.2017 with the respondent, has been dismissed.

2. In the aforementioned petition, appellant/petitioner by referring the date of marriage as 22.12.2017 alleged that after the marriage he was working abroad and as decided between the couple, the appellant would go back to his place of employment after the marriage. At the time of marriage, the petitioner had given a gold chain weighing 6 sovereigns to the respondent as Mehar. During his stay outside the country, he had to meet educational expenses of the respondent for the T.T.I. course. Respondent had some issues with the family and the appellant necessitating the appellant to come back on 16.02.2020. A meeting of two families was proposed to be conducted on 15.03.2020, but the said meeting did not entail into positive result as the respondent by that time had enabled to seek employment in Government Girls School, perinthalmanna.

3. On 09.07.2021, respondent issued a communication by pronouncing Khula for dissolving the marriage with the appellant. The aforementioned Khula was pronounced without holding any mediation or conciliation. For declaration of Khula, respondent – wife preferred O.P.No.607/2021. The said petition after contest by the appellant was allowed by the competent court vide judgment and decree dated 03.01.2022.

4. On the other hand, respondent – wife contested the aforementioned petition and held that appellant created hurdles for preventing the respondent to perform a marriage. Mehar of 5 sovereigns received by the respondent was offered for return but refused to accept the same in proceedings in O.P.No.607/2021. Thus, the declaration claiming the marriage to be still subsisted, in the absence of any challenge to the judgment and decree dated 03.01.2022 in O.P.No.607/2021, would not be maintainable. Respondent on 15.07.2021 performed marriage with Muhammed Thanveer in accordance with Islamic rites and also claimed compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakhs only) from the appellant for causing obstruction to her second marriage.

5. Since the parties were at variance trial court framed the following issues:

I. Whether the dissolution of marriage of the respondent with the petitioner effected by the respondent on 09.07.2021 by pronouncing Khula is valid.

II. Whether the petitioner had suffered any injury due to the wrongful termination of marriage if any by the respondent and what is quantum of compensation if any to be paid.

III. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get a decree for return of Mehar ornaments?

IV. Whether the respondent is entitled to get any compensation for the alleged mental pain and agony caused by obstruction to her second marriage by petitioner and if so, what is the reasonable amount of compensation.

6. Appellant examined himself as PW1 and placed on record Exts.A1 to A7 whereas respondent examined herself as RW1 and examined RW2 and RW3.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that findings of the judgment and decree of the family court is wholly unsustainable and untenable in the eyes of law for, the extra judicial divorce (Khula) has declared by the respondent – wife is not in accordance with the ratio decidendiculledoutbytheDivisionBenchofthisCourtin X and Others v. Y and Others [ 2021 (2) KHC 709 : AIR 2021 Ker. 124. ] wherein it has been held that there is no impediment for the wife for dissolving the marital status ie., unilateral dissolution of marriage by invoking Khula and Talaq and scope of inquiry before the Family Court is limited. No conciliation proceedings as required under the Muslim Law before pronouncement of Khula and declaration was ever held. In support of the contention, paragraph 77 of the judgment has been cited and the husband has the