Husband appealed against a Family Court decree annulling his marriage on the wife's petition alleging her consent was obtained by parental coercion, with no cohabitation or consummation. The Division Bench concurred with the findings and dismissed the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.06.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL
C.M.A.No.2805 of 2022 & CMP.No.21848 of 2022
S. Manibalan ... Appellant
Vs.
D. Anbukarasi ... Respondent
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under section 19 of Family Courts Act against the judgment and decree dated 15th November 2022 made in HMOP.No.159 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Cuddalore.
For Appellant : Mr. S. Lakshmanasamy For Respondent : Mr. R. Kamaraj
1 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the appellant challenging order passed by the Family Court, Cuddalore in HMOP.No.159 of 2020 dated 15.11.2022.
2 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
appellant and the respondent has been performed with the consent of the respondent. According to him, the respondent never consumed poison and it is a false statement of the respondent. The solemnized marriage cannot be nullified without sufficient cause contemplated under the Act.
3.1. The learned Family Court Judge, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, and on hearing submissions on either side, allowed the HMOP on the ground that the marriage was not performed out of the free will and consent of the respondent herein and therefore came to the conclusion that there was no cohabitation between the parties.
3.2. Challenging the judgment and decree nullifying the marriage, the husband, as appellant, preferred the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
the averment mentioned in the petition will not attract section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The wife, in order to substantiate her pleadings, has let in only oral evidence and the same is not corroborated by any documentary evidence. There was no quarrel between them and she never consumed poison. The evidence given by the father of wife is not believable. The wife is an educated person and
3 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
was employed in Survey Department and the marriage has been performed with the full consent of the wife, however, without any reason, she suddenly filed a petition seeking annulment of marriage on the ground that her consent was obtained by her parents by force. Therefore, he prayed for allowing of this appeal.
4 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
sides that there is no cohabitation between the parties. Taking into consideration,
the above facts, it granted the relief of annulment of marriage. Hence, the order passed by the Family Judge warrants no interference, therefore he prayed for dismissal of this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.
i. Whether the respondent is entitled to a decree for the relief of annulment of marriage on the ground that consent was obtained by force and by fraud?
sought for by the respondent under section 12(1)(b) and 12(1)(c) is not maintainable in law and the averments raised in the petition will not come under section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act reads thus;
5 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
'12.Voidable Marriages:-
on the ground when the same was performed by force or by fraud. In the instant
case on hand, it seen that the marriage of the wife was performed with the appellant without her own consent and wish, but the same was done under the compulsion of respondent's parents. Though she was not willing to marry the appellant, she was threatened by her parents that if she did not give her consent to marry the appellant, they would consume poison and the abovesaid fact was
admitted by the respondent in her evidence as follows;
'vdf;F khg;gps;is gpof;ftpy;iy vd;W vd; bgw;nwhhplk; brhd;ndd;/ vd; bgw;nwhh; khg;gps;is tPl;ow;F ngha ; tpl;L te;Jtpl;nlhk; ,g;go brhy;Yfpwhna eh';fs; vg;go mth;fsplk; ngRtJ vd;W ngrpf;bfhz;oUe;njhk;////
6 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
The above evidence reveals that the respondent/wife is not willing to marry the
appellant/husband.
“'nkYk; vdJ kfsplk; ehd; brhy;YtJ nghy; jpUkzk; bra;J bfhs;stpy;iy vd;why; ehd; jw;bfhiy bra;Jbfhs;ntd; vd;W kpul;ondd;/ vdJ kfSk; vdJ kpul;lYf;F gae;J ,Ue;Jtpl;lhh;/“
In the instant case, the consent of the respondent/wife was obtained by her
parents by force or compulsion or threatening that they would commit suicide.
Therefore, it is clear that the averment in the petition come under section 12 (1) (c) of Hindu Marriage Act.
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
with the appellant in a separate family set up, for a short period. Within a short
span of marriage, she being unable to bear the physical and mental torture given by the husband, consumed poison. But admittedly, the same was denied by the appellant in his evidence.
''kDjhuh; kUe;J Foj;Jtpl;L gz;Ul;o muR kUj;Jtkidapy; rpfpr;irapy; ,Ue;jhh;/ Mdhy; bfhLik vJt[k; bra;atpy;iy. ''
From the admission of RW2, it is clear that the respondent consumed poison and
was admitted in hospital for treatment and having regard to the same, she has lodged a complaint against her husband/appellant and her in-laws.
8 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
under compulsion and threatening made by the parents of the respondent. The respondent, not able to tolerate such unwilling marriage, consumed poison and has been rescued by her neighbours. There was no cohabitation between the parties and the marriage was not consummated till date. The respondent is not willing to live with the appellant. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, We concur with the findings of the court below that the respondent/wife is entitled to get the relief of annulment of marriage. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is devoid of merits and accordingly it is hereby dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[J.N.B.,J.] [P.D.B.,J.] 26.06.2024
Index: yes/no Internet:yes/no msr To The VII Addl. Family Court, Chennai.
J. NISHA BANU, J. &
P. DHANABAL, J.
msr
9 of 10
CMA.No.2805 of 2022
C.M.A.No.2805 of 2022 & CMP.No.21848 of 2022
26.06.2024
10 of 10
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the wife was entitled to annulment of the marriage on the ground that her consent was obtained by force and fraud under section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
S. Manibalan
D. Anbukarasi
J. Nisha Banu
P. Dhanabal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
