Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yogendra Singh vs Jyoti on 25 September, 2025
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569
1
FA-52-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
FIRST APPEAL No. 52 of 2018
YOGENDRA SINGH
Versus
JYOTI
.............................................................................................................................
Appearance:
Shri Satyendra Kumar Vyas - Senior Advocate with Shri - Advocate for
the appellant.
Shri Amar Singh Rathore - Advocate for the respondent.
.............................................................................................................................
Reserved on : 17/09/2025
Pronounced on : 25/09/2025
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'HMA') has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 05.10.2017 passed by Additional District Judge, Nagda, district Ujjain in Case No.09/2017 whereby the application filed by the appellant/husband under Section 12(1)(c) of HMA has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 2 FA-52-2018 dismissed.
2. It is undisputed marriage of the appellant with respondent was solemnized on 23.01.2011 in Basant Palace, Nagda, Ujjain.
3. The case of the appellant/husband is that he is an (IT Educated) talented Engineer working in a private Company situated at Hyderabad. He wished for highly educated wife. On 27.02.2010, father, brother and brother-in-law of respondent came to him with a proposal of marriage with biodata of the respondent. In conversation with the father of the respondent, it was disclosed that respondent is having Diploma in Computer Engineering, Hardware and Networking. Exaggerating the social status of his family, the father of the respondent put forward the marriage of the respondent with the appellant. On this representation, on 08.03.2010 he went for meeting the respondent. When he demanded the Diploma mark sheet, the brother of the respondent pleaded non-availability of the mark sheet with further assertion that it has been given to some agent for issuance of passport and as soon as it is received back, it will be supplied to him. On this assurance, misrepresentation about qualification in engineering of the respondent, he agreed for marriage. Betrothal ceremony took place and on 23.01.2011 marriage was solemnized with great pomp and show.
3.1 It is further pleaded that even after marriage, Diploma mark sheet was not supplied to him. Respondent remained in the company of the appellant for about 15 days in matrimonial house. Thereafter, her parents took her to Nagda and the appellant went to Hyderabad. On 02.03.2011, she was brought to Hyderabad by her father. In the meantime, the appellant Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 3 FA-52-2018 told the respondent that he is searching for her job, therefore she should call her Diploma mark sheet, but she did not give any positive reply and remained evasive to produce the same. After some time suspicion arose regarding engineering qualification of the respondent on which bitterness arose between their relation. After that in April on Ashtami Puja, the appellant came to Nagda with the respondent and leaving her there he again returned back to Hyderabad. From 15.04.2011 she was residing with her parents. In the meantime, also he repeatedly requested for mark sheet but that was not supplied. Thereafter, tension crept in their matrimonial relationship. When he had internet search about the technical educational qualification of the respondent, it was found that she has failed in technical education in the result declared on 08.02.2011. When he objected about misrepresentation with regard to the technical educational qualification, the family members of the respondent threatened him that now marriage is solemnized and if he proceeded for any action he will be lodged in jail in dowry case. It also came to the knowledge of the appellant that in the examination the photograph of some other lady was found pasted on the admission card of the respondent. Thus, it was apparent that appellant had been cheated by the respondent and her family members therefore, he has filed the suit before the concerned Court for declaring the marriage null and void.
4. Respondent in her written statement controverted all the allegations made in the plaint / petition filed by the appellant. It has been specifically pleaded that no misrepresentation has been made with regard to the educational qualification of the respondent. The marriage has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 4 FA-52-2018 solemnized with the appellant after disclosing the relevant information required by him and with the full informed consent of the appellant their marriage was solemnised. In the meantime, the appellant along with the family members were fully aware that the Diploma course of the respondent is to be completed on 08.08.2010. The appellant himself had sent notes to assist her for clearing her withheld subjects. On 08.10.2010 the respondent has cleared all the subjects and got the course completed. The petition has been filed willfully for grabbing more dowry. No case for declaring her marriage null and void is made out and thus prayed for dismissal of the petition/suit.
5. The learned trial Court on pleading of the parties framed relevant six issues for resolving the controversy and after affording opportunity of leading oral and documentary evidence and hearing the parties vide the impugned judgment dismissed the application/petition of the appellant holding that he has failed to prove that his marriage with the respondent has been solemnized on misrepresentation with regard to the technical educational qualification of the respondent. Feeling crustfallen by impugned judgment and decree, the appellant has filed the present appeal.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant criticizing the judgment and decree submits that there is ample evidence on record to prove that respondent and her family members, on misrepresentation with regard to technical educational qualification of the respondent have got solemnized the marriage of the respondent with the appellant. This has been proved by evidence made available on record, but the trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in right perspective. Hence, prays for allowing the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 5 FA-52-2018 appeal by setting aside impugned judgment and decree and declaring the marriage between the appellant and respondent as null and void.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent by supporting the impugned judgment submits that no case for declaring the marriage as null and void is made out as each and every thing was made clear with regard to the allegations of the appellant and members of his family. It is further submitted that now they have come under the greed of grabbing much more dowry and are pressurizing the respondent and members of her family by filing this petition. The appellant could not prove any content with regard to getting a decree as desired by him. On this premise, learned counsel for the respondent urges the court for dismissing the appeal.
8. Heard and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. It is befitting to go through the provisions contained under Section 12(1)(c) of HMA for resolving the controversy involved in the instant appeal . The relevant portion which provides for voidable marriage reads as under:-
"12 (1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be voidable and may be annulled by a decree of nullity on any of the following grounds, namely:-
(a)----------------
(b)-----------------
(c) that the consent of the petitioner, or where the consent of the guardian in marriage of the petitioner was required under section 5 as it stood immediately before the commencement of the Child Marriage Restraint (Amendment) Act, 1978 (2 of 1978), the consent of such guardian was obtained by force or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 6 FA-52-2018 material fact or circumstance concerning the respondent; or"
12. From perusal of the sub clause (c) of Section 12(1) of HMA it is apparent that when consent of the appellant is obtained by force or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as to any material fact or circumstance concerning respondent, the marriage shall be voidable and may be annulled by a decree of nullity. From perusal of the impugned judgment, this Court finds that issues no.1 to 3 framed by the Court below are relevant and material for resolving the controversy involved in the case, as the case of the appellant is that he is highly educated engineer employed in private company in Hyderabad and wished to marry highly educated lady and after solemnization of marriage, he found that his wife respondent was not having Diploma in Computer Engineering, Hardware and Networking. In this regard he has reiterated the allegations leveled against father, brother and brother-in-law of the respondent/wife, in his statement before the court . He has deposed that the aforesaid persons when came with an offer for marriage of the respondent with him, they exaggerating their societal prestige, misrepresented about the fact that the respondent is having Diploma in Computer Engineering, Hardware and Networking which was found false later on after the marriage. On 15.12.2011 when he searched the internet on the site of Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education as per the result declared on 08.02.2011, the respondent was declared failed. Thus, his consent for marriage was obtained on misrepresentation. He further submits that he also discovered that photograph of some other lady was pasted on the admit card issued in favour of the respondent. Thus, she has also committed fraud with the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 7 FA-52-2018 Board also. It has come on record that after completion of enquiry with regard to pasting of photograph of some other lady in the admit card of the respondent, result has been declared which in itself reveals that complaint was found false. Thus, the aforesaid allegation has no bearing on the controversy involved in the case.
13. To substantiate the allegation with regard to misrepresentation of educational qualification of the respondent/wife, the appellant has examined himself as PW-1 and in support thereof he has examined Hari Singh (PW-2), his father and Kishore Singh, maternal uncle mousa (PW-
3) and has also filed documents Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-6. In rebuttal thereof respondent/wife has examined herself before the Court as DW-1, her brother Deepak as DW-2 and documents Ex.D-1 three years Diploma in Computer Engineering and certificate Ex.D-2 relating to Cisco certificate of Diploma in Hardware and Networking course. Other documents Ex.D-3 to Ex.D-7 have also been filed to rebut the case of the appellant. Even though in marriage invitation card Ex.P-1 after the name of respondent/wife in bracket Diploma in Computer Engineering has been mentioned, but it is not sufficient to prove that at the time of marriage, there was misrepresentation with regard to the educational qualification of the respondent/wife and it was actually condition precedent for consent given by the appellant for marriage with the respondent. In paragraph 23 of the cross examination, appellant has admitted that marriage invitation card was given by Shyam Singh to him for distribution. He has further admitted that he was having knowledge that she has completed the Diploma in Computer Engineering and he has believed on it. Case of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 8 FA-52-2018 Respondent/Jyoti (DW-1) has been that appellant was having knowledge that some subjects of Diploma course were not cleared therefore, he had sent notes to assist her and after that she has completed the Diploma course. Evidence in this regard has remained intact which in itself prove that appellant was having knowledge about the fact that her Diploma in Computer Engineering at the time of marriage was in progress, and the same was not condition precedent for marriage coupled with the fact that with the assistance of the appellant the same qualification has been acquired by the respondent.
14. In para 30 of the judgment, the trial Court on the basis of the evidence available on record has found that on the liking of the appellant, marriage was settled. During appreciation of testimony of Kishore Singh (PW-3) it has been mentioned in the judgment that brother of the respondent has clearly stated that respondent is pursuing her course in Diploma in Computer Engineering which in itself falsifies the stand of the appellant that the family members of the respondent have misrepresented with regard to the technical educational qualification of the respondent before the negotiations were going on for marriage. Taking into account the oral as well as the documentary evidence the trial Court has come to the conclusion that appellant has failed to prove that marriage of the respondent was solemnized with the appellant on misrepresentation about her educational qualification in engineering field and has also concluded that the appellant and his family members were very well knowing that respondent has to complete her Diploma course and that she has cleared on 08.02.2011. Thus, we are of the considered view that it is not Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 9 FA-52-2018 misrepresentation of the respondent and her family members which induced appellant to enter into marriage with the respondent.
15. The Bombay High Court in the case of Raghunath Gopal Daftardar Vs. Vijay Raghunath Gopal Daftardar reported in 1971 SCC Online Bom 52 : (1971) 73 Bom LR8 40: AIR 1972 Bom 132 has held that the word "fraud" used in Section 12(1)(c) of HMA does not speak of fraud in any general way, nor does it mean every misrepresentation or concealment, which may be fraudulent. Relevant paras 13 to 19 of the judgment may be aptly reproduced, which runs as under:
13. This Act also does not define fraud and, therefore, it is of no assistance to us in this case. But it is well settled under the Indian Divorce Act that fraudulent misrepresentation in inducing consent to marriage does not vitiate a marriage. I have not been pointed out any decided case under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, which lays down that non-disclosure, or concealment of a fact and/or misrepresentation of a fact amounts to fraud. It seems to me, therefore, that even under the Indian Divorce Act, of 1869, the definition of „fraud‟ given in s. 17 of the Indian Contract Act does not appear to apply. It is true that this High Court has held in A. v. B. [(1952) 54 Bom. L.R. 725.], that a Hindu marriage is also a civil contract. But at the same time, the learned Judge (Tendolkar, J.) has held in that case that a Hindu marriage is also a sacrament. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does not depart from this position, under the Hindu Law. I am, therefore, of the opinion that s. 17 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, does not apply to a case of fraud under s. 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
14. The question still remains what then is the meaning of the word "fraud". D. Tolstoy on the Law and Practice of Divorce, 6th edn., has expressed thus (p.112):
"...The test in all cases is whether there is real consent, not only to marry but also to marry the particular person. But Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 10 FA-52-2018 provided such consent exists, it is immaterial whether it is induced by a fraudulent misrepresentation;"
15. Similarly, Rayden on Divorce, 10th edn., at page 98, says that "...fraudulent misrepresentation, or concealment, does not affect the validity of a marriage to which the parties freely consented with a knowledge of the nature of the contract. But if a person is induced to go through a ceremony of marriage by threats or duress, or in a state of intoxication, without any real consent to the marriage, it is invalid: in all such cases the test of validity is real consent to the marriage."
16. Latey on Divorce, 14th edn., at page 19, also observes that "Misrepresentation or concealment of facts which if known to one of the parties might have prevented his or her marriage does not invalidate a marriage, providing that there were free consent."
17. Coming to the authors on Hindu Law, Derrett in his Introduction to Modern Hindu Law, 1963 edn., at page 193, says thus:--
"...If in fact the marriage would have been agreed to even had the facts been known, it seems that the marriage cannot be annulled, nor, it seems, in even stronger cases where full disclosures would have prevented the marriage; for fraudulent misrepresentation or concealment does not affect the validity of a marriage to which the parties freely consented with knowledge of its nature and with the clear and distinct intention of entering into the marriage in question."
18. Similarly, in Mulla's Hindu Law, 13th edn. at page 682, we have these observations:
"...A person who freely consents to a solemnization of the marriage with the other party in accordance with customary ceremonies, that is, with knowledge of the nature of the ceremonies and intention to marry, cannot raise an objection to the validity of the marriage on the ground of any fraudulent representation or concealment. The test to be applied is Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 11 FA-52-2018 whether there was any real consent to the solemnization of the marriage."
19. It would thus be seen that the word "fraud" used in s. 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act does not speak of fraud in any general way, nor does it mean every misrepresentation or concealment which may be fraudulent. If the consent given by the parties is a real consent to the solemnization of the marriage, the same cannot be avoided on the ground of fraud. The marriage, therefore, solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act cannot be avoided by showing that the petitioner was induced to marry the respondent by fraudulent statements relating to her health."
16. High Court of Madras in the case of A. Premchand Vs. V. Padmapriya reported in 1997 AIR (Mad) 135 : 1996 Supreme (Mad) 1105 has held that even if prior to the solemnization of the marriage there is fraudulent misrepresentation with regard to the status of the party, educational qualifications, financial situation, state of health, or even virginity, cannot be a ground to annul the marriage. Relevant para of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced as under:
"If any marriage solemnized may be annulled on the ground that the 'consent' was obtained by fraud the consent must have been to such solemnization. Normally parties agree upon the marriage proposal prior to the solemnization ceremony. There would be proposal and acceptance and it is after such acceptance that the parties agree upon a date and time for the marriage ceremony. Therefore even prior to the solemnization there is a stage at which consent is given by one party to the other. May be there is fraudulent misrepresentation at that stage. That may be with regard to the status of the party, educational qualifications, financial situation, state of health, or even virginity. But at the time when solemnization takes place pursuant to such consent there is no question of any misrepresentation on any of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: REENA JOSEPH Signing time: 25-09-2025 15:28:45 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27569 12 FA-52-2018 above grounds. There could be fraud or there could be force in the matter of solemnization, independent of these matters. To these cases S.12 (1)(c) will be attracted but not to a case where though there is no fraud or force in the solemnization of the marriage there is fraud or misrepresentation for obtaining consent to the proposal for the marriage."
17. Applying the said ratio to the present case, in the backdrop of the aforesaid discussion, it is not found proven that any fraud has been committed by the respondents as provided in section 12(1)(c) of the HMA. It is trite law that the plaintiff has to prove his/her case on the basis of cogent and reliable evidence, he/she cannot take the benefit of weaknesses of the defendant. On this principle and the principle of preponderance of probability, the plaintiff has failed to prove his case. The Trial Court has rightly given the finding on the issues upon proper appreciation of evidence, no ground is made out to interfere with the judgment and decree of the trial Court.
18. Resultantly, by affirming the findings of the trial Court, this appeal filed on behalf of the appellant, which is bereft of any merits fails, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI)
JUDGE JUDGE
RJ
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: REENA JOSEPH
Signing time: 25-09-2025
15:28:45