Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Karnataka High Court

Smt. Archana vs Sri D R Lakshminarayana on 19 August, 2014

Bench: K.L.Manjunath, A.V.Chandrashekara

                                      MFA NO.829/2014

                          1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

    DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014

                      PRESENT

    THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH

                         AND

 THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.V.CHANDRASHEKARA

              MFA NO.829 OF 2014 (FC)


BETWEEN:

Smt.Archana
W/o D.R.Lakshminarayana
Aged about 28 years
R/o #281/B, Ayappa Road
1st Main Road, Sarakki Garden
J P Nagar 6th Phase
Bangalore - 560 078.
                                        ... APPELLANT
(By Smt.Divya Krishna, Advocate for
     M/s.Sivan & Siva Assts.)


AND:

Sri.D.R.Lakshminarayana
S/o D.Ravindranatha Gupta
Aged about 33 years
R/o Sheshasai Nilaya, No.55/A
2nd Cross, Yadalam Nagara
                                        MFA NO.829/2014

                             2


Subramanyapura
Bangalore - 560 061.
                                            ...RESPONDENT
(By Sri.Narendra D.V.Gowda, Advocate)

      MFA is filed under Section 19(1) of the Family
Courts Act r/w Sec 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act,
against the judgment and decree dated 28.11.2013
passed in M.C.No.2992/2010 on the file of the 5th
Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore,
allowing the petition filed under Section12(1)(c) of the
Hindu Marriage Act.

     This MFA coming on for Further Orders this day,
A.V.Chandrashekara J., delivered the following:-

                          JUDGMENT

By consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

Appellant herein was the respondent in a Case M.C.No.2992/2010 which was pending on the file of 5th Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore. Respondent herein was the petitioner in the said case. The parties are referred to their ranking as referred before the trial Court.

3

2. Petitioner's marriage with the respondent was solemnized as per customs on 31.01.2010 at Bangalore. They led their marital life for some time and had gone to Tirupathi to seek the blessings of the Almighty on 14.02.2010. After few days of the marriage, petitioner came to know that the respondent, who is his wife and her parents had suppressed the material facts about her cardiac problem and therefore, he was left with no opportunity except to file a petition seeking annulment of marriage under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The said petition was resisted by the respondent on various grounds and petitioner was called upon to prove the allegations strictly.

3. Petitioner himself examined as PW-1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P5. Respondent herself is examined as RW-1 and got marked Exs.R1 to R7. Ultimately, the learned Judge has chosen to allow the petition and the MFA NO.829/2014 4 marriage under Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been annulled by framing the following two points for consideration:

1. Whether the petitioner proves that the respondent and her family members by suppressing the material fact with regard to the health condition of respondent have performed her marriage with him?

2. What order?"

4. The impugned judgment dated 28.11.2013 is called in question on various grounds as set out in the appeal memo.

5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. After going through the records and hearing the arguments, we are of the opinion that the matter needs to be remitted to the trial Court for recording evidence afresh apart from what has been already recorded. We find that other than the parties, no body has been examined in support of their respective case to MFA NO.829/2014 5 prove the inability of the respondent to be able to procreate children. Nothing is placed on record to prove that the respondent was suffering from congenital heart disease prior to the marriage. Congenital heart disease occurs when the heart or blood vessels entering or leaving the heart do not develop normally before birth.

6. Medical records placed before the trial Court are subsequent to the marriage. Just because the respondent has admitted certain medical documents, it would not be proper to contend that he has been successful in making out a clear case relating to her congenital heart problem. Suffice to state that the evidence placed on record is quite inadequate to annul the marriage solemnised in accordance with the customs of the parties. Therefore, the matter in question needs to be remitted to the trial Court for the parties to lead further evidence, if necessary to adduce evidence in regard to the medical condition of the MFA NO.829/2014 6 respondent. Hence, appeal needs to be allowed by setting aside the judgment dated 28.11.2013.

ORDER

7. Appeal is allowed. Judgment dated 28.11.2013 passed in M.C.No.2992/2010 by the V Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore is set aside. Matter is remitted to the trial Court to permit the parties to lead additional evidence and if necessary, to lead evidence in regard to the medical condition of the respondent. Parties shall appear before the trial Court on 14.10.2014. Thereafter, the learned Judge shall try to dispose of the case within six months, thereafter.

At this stage, submission is made on behalf of the appellant that interim maintenance is not paid. Learned Counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the arrears of maintenance will be made good in the mean time.

7

Submission of both counsel is placed on record. There is no order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE Prs*