JUDGMENT 1. - This Miscellaneous appeal has been preferred by the husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the judgement & decree dated Feb. 26 1985, passed by the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, on a wife's petition U/s 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 2. The respondent Sangita filed a petition before the District Judge, Jaipur City for declaration that her marriage with the appellant was a nullity. The facts as alleged in the petition are that she was married to the appellant on April 22. 1983, according to Hindu rites and customs including Saptapadi, at her residence in Jawahar agar, Jaipur. On the day after her marriage, before it could be consummated. she came to know that the appellant was already a married man and his wife Smt. Munni Devi d/o Radhey Shyam Sharma and another wife Smt. Vidhya Devi d/o Raghunath Prasad Sharma were alive and the appellant had not been legally separated from them. This fact was deliberately concealed by the appellant and she was made to undergo the rituals of the marriage. She prayed that her marriage be declared void. A list of the articles, which were given at the time of the marriage was also enclosed with the petition. 3. The appellant in his reply to the petition did not make very specific assertions but stated that para I of the petition is not admitted in the manner in which it has been stated. This para relates to the fact of the performance of the marriage of the respondent to the appellant. However, Para No. 4, which is about the appellant having a number of previous wives was denied and no specific reply has been given to it. He also took the plea that the Hindu Marriage Act was not applicable to the parties. He stated that when the alleged marriage was itself void as per the petitioner herself, then she did not require any decree to get it declared void. The list of articles annexed to the petition was said to be incorrect. 4. The respondent examined the witnesses Munni Devi and Vidhya Devi alleged wives of the appellant, Radhey Shyam, father of Munni Devi and Shri Chandra Prakash, who performed the marriage of the respondent to the appellant. The appellant Ambe Prasad examined two witnesses Sita Ram and Sharwan Lal. 5. 4. The respondent examined the witnesses Munni Devi and Vidhya Devi alleged wives of the appellant, Radhey Shyam, father of Munni Devi and Shri Chandra Prakash, who performed the marriage of the respondent to the appellant. The appellant Ambe Prasad examined two witnesses Sita Ram and Sharwan Lal. 5. The learned District Judge framed the following issues on the pleadings of the parties. HINDI MATTER 377313A 6. It may be stated here that as per the pleadings before the Court, it appears that the fact of the appellant's marriage to the respondent was not specifically denied, therefore. the learned lower Court framed the issue as to whether the appellant was already a married man when he married the respondent and as such this marriage is null and void. However. the parties led evidence about ceremonies which took place at the time of marriage between the appellant and the respondent. The learned District Judge came to the conclusion that the ceremonies of the marriage of the respondent and the appellant were completed according to Hindu rites and customs. It was further held that on April 22, 1983, when the appellant married the petitioner he was already a married man, having lawfully wedded wives, who were not legally separated and as such his marriage with the respondent was void and therefore, it was annulled. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant has first of all contended that the issue no. 1, which has been framed in this case, proceeds on the assumption of a valid marriage between the appellant and the respondent, when according to him this was not so. On account of this presupposition, on the part of the court, he moved an application on February 17, 1984, for framing of as many as seven additional issues but this application was rejected. The learned District Judge held that all the matters in dispute between the parties could be decided in the issue which was framed and as such it was not necessary to frame additional issues. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the word marriage' when used in legal proceedings refers to a valid marriage and when the marriage, as alleged by the respondent was denied by him, then a specific issue about the marriage between the respondent and the appellant ought to have been framed. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the word marriage' when used in legal proceedings refers to a valid marriage and when the marriage, as alleged by the respondent was denied by him, then a specific issue about the marriage between the respondent and the appellant ought to have been framed. According to him the solemnization of a valid marriage cannot be said to be covered by the present issue and this matter cannot he decided in the proceedings without which the relief prayed cannot be granted. 8. According to the learned counsel for the respondent, the Court has to frame issues on basis of the pleading of the parties and when a point which has been specifically raised by the plaintiff is not specifically denied by the other party, it cannot form basis of an issue. When in the petition it was specifically alleged that the respondent was married to the appellant according to the hindu rites and customs including the Saplapadi then unless this fact was specifically denied by the appellant, it should be deemed to have been admitted by him and as such no issue was necessary. 9. Considering the fact that the appellant in his reply to the petition did not raise specific allegations as to what matters were admitted by him and what matters were denied by him, in my view, he cannot now be allowed to take the plea that he has been, in any way, prejudiced by the court's order refusing to frame additional issues. In fact it was the respondent who was left guessing as to what was necessary for her to prove in view of the evasive denial of the appellant and now when the parties have led evidence and specially the appellant has taken up all the pleas which he wanted to raise in his reply but did not do so specifically, and came out with them only at the time of his statement, it can no longer be said that the absence of certain issues has, in any way, affected the trial of the case. I may again refer to the reply to para No. I of the petition which merely states that this para, as stated, is not correct, hence not admitted. I may again refer to the reply to para No. I of the petition which merely states that this para, as stated, is not correct, hence not admitted. It does not say that a marriage between him and the respondent was performed in same other manner or it was not in accordance with the hindu rites and customs or no marriage was performed at all. In his statement the appellant has deposed that the marriage was performed by exchange of garlands in a temple Without putting this version in his written reply, the respondent or the Court could not know his stand so as to frame an issue about it. If any prejudice is caused by the absence of specific pleadings, then it is to the respondent. It will be useful to refer to 0. 8 rr. 3, 4. and 5 C. P. C. which require that every denial has to be specific and if not denied specifically, it will be deemed to have been admitted. 10. Even if it can be said that the District Judge failed to frame proper issues, then it cannot affect the decision of the case as it has not caused any prejudice to the appellant. The case of (1) Girdhari Singh and another v. Gokul and others ( AIR 1976 Raj. 10 ). can be relevant in this connection. It has been held that when the parties went to trial fully knowing the rival case and led all evidence in support of their contentions, then in the circumstances, it could not be said that the absence of the issue was fatal to the case or that there was such mistrial which vitiated the entire proceedings. 11. In (2) Nedunuri Karneswaramma v. Sampati Subba Rao (AIR 1963 SC 994), it has been held as under:- No doubt, no issue was framed, and the one, which was framed, could have been more elaborate; but since the parties went to trial fully knowing the rival case and led all the evidence not only in support of their contentions but in refutation of those of the other side, it cannot be said that the absence of an issue was fatal to the case, or that there was that mistrial which vitiates proceedings. We are, therefore, of opinion that the suit could not be dismissed on this narrow ground, and also that there is no need for a remit, as the evidence which has been led in the case is sufficient to reach the right conclusion. Neither party claimed before us that it had any further evidence to offer. 12. Now, I shall come to the main point in dispute between the parties. In order to decide whether the marriage of the respondent with the appellant is null and void, it has to be first seen whether the respondent was married according to hindu rites and customs to the appellant. If this is decided in favour of the respondent then it will have to be seen whether the appellant was a previously married man and for this purpose the evidence about his marriage to Munni Devi and Vidya Devi shall be considered. 13. Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides that a Hindu marriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies of either party thereto and where such rites and ceremonies include the Saptapadi (that is, the taking of seven steps by the bride-groom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken. 14. In the present case the respondent has herself pleaded in her petition that her marriage to the appellant was performed according to the Hindu rites and customs, which included Saptapadi, therefore, Saptapadi becomes a necessary ingredient for the purpose of a complete marriage. The ceremonies in a hindu marriage are numerous. Certain rites can be said to be preliminary, while there are others, which are the essence of the ceremony and can be said to be the essential rites. Saptapadi is an essential rite to be performed and this may not be the same as taking rounds of the fire. 15. The respondent in this case has quoted certain authorities in order to show that are the essentials of a valid marriage. The same may be looked into before referring to the evidence in this case. 16. The ceremony of Saptapadi has been described by P.V. Kane in his History of Dharmasastra, as under:- "Saptapadi : (taking seven steps together). 15. The respondent in this case has quoted certain authorities in order to show that are the essentials of a valid marriage. The same may be looked into before referring to the evidence in this case. 16. The ceremony of Saptapadi has been described by P.V. Kane in his History of Dharmasastra, as under:- "Saptapadi : (taking seven steps together). This is done to the north of the fire; there are seven small heaps of rice and the bride-groom makes the bride step on each of these seven with her right foot beginning from the west". 17. Whether these seven steps are to be taken at one time or in between other ceremonies, is a matter on which the Pandits differ. The seven steps signify certain spmbols such as desire, welfare, happiness. co-operation etc. which are expressed in Sanskrit shlokas. The chantation of Mantras which is done alongwith taking the seven steps, becomes relevant in this connection. 18. In his book Sanskar Vidhi', Shrikanth Shastri, while dealing with the essential ceremonies of performing the marriage has stated that the bride should lead and the bride-groom should follow and should take a round of the fire. thereafter, they should stand on the west of the fire, hold hands and then take another round of the fire and similarly take two more rounds. By doing this, it amounts to performing nine offerings Before the third round of the fire the brother of the wife gives some corns to his sister and they are offered to the fire, thereafter, the fourth round is taken and after that the bride and bride-groom walk seven steps towards north, touching seven small heaps of rice. Thereafter, the bride is made to sit on the left of the bride-groom to signify that the marriage is complete. It is the taming of the bride on the left side which signifies the performance of Saptapadi-cermony and this taking of seven steps and changing of place by the bride concludes the essential ceremony. Before coming to the left, the bride asks the bride-groom to make some promises and on the bride-groom accepting the same, the positions are changed. 19. Pandit Ram Swaroop Sharma in his book 'Arth Vivah Padati' says that four rounds of fire are to be taken alongwith chantation of Mantras and then the seven steps are taken signifying different aspects of life. 19. Pandit Ram Swaroop Sharma in his book 'Arth Vivah Padati' says that four rounds of fire are to be taken alongwith chantation of Mantras and then the seven steps are taken signifying different aspects of life. Both the bride and bride-groom make promises and then the bride comes on the left. Thus it is taking of seven steps in the north direction and then changing the side of bride, which concludes the ceremony of Saptapadi. 20. It has been seen above that the respondent in her petition pleaded marriage according to the hindu rites and customs including the Saptapadi-method but it was not specifically denied in the written statement as to whether the appellant denied the marriage itself or he denied the performance of essential conditions of a valid-marriage. The respondent, therefore. led evidence to show that her marriage with the appellant was performed without over-emphasizing the details. However, it will be seen from the evidence in the case as to whether the essential ceremonies of marriage were performed or not in order to say that the ceremonies can be said to constitute a valid marriage. 21. P.W. 1 Sangeeta has stated that she was married to the appellant according to the Hindu rites and customs. She did not enumerate this in her examination-in-chief. But in cross-examination, she stated that at the time of the marriage she exchanged garlands with the appellant and took four rounds of sacred fire. 22. P. W. 4 Chandra Dhar Sharma is the person who acted as a Pandit to perform the marriage of appellant with the respondent and he has stated that he performed the marriage according to hindu rites and customs and the exact words are:- HINDI MATTER 377313B He has not been put any question in cross-examination as to the meaning of the ceremonies performed by him. He has admitted that the Brahmin who was appointed to perform the marriage did not turn up hence he was requested to do this job. At that time he was a Professor in the Rajasthan University and he used to do the work of performing marriages. As against this evidence of the non petitioner, the appellant Ambe Prasad stated that at the time of his marriage to the respondent, there was exchange of garlands in the temple of Hanumanji and this was all that was done. As against this evidence of the non petitioner, the appellant Ambe Prasad stated that at the time of his marriage to the respondent, there was exchange of garlands in the temple of Hanumanji and this was all that was done. This took place at about mid night and thereafter be came to the farm of Kishan Lal Ji in morning. He was confronted with certain photographs taken at the time of marriage which show him dressed up as a bride groom, sitting on a horse-back and even in the Mandap, where the ceremonies were performed. In one photograph Pandit Chandra Dhar, who acted as the Pandit is either washing the feet of the appellant or doing some similar act, while in another, the bride and bride-groom are holding hands sitting in the Mandap. Some ghee in a katori is kept in alongwith a spoon by which offering is made to the fire. All photographs cannot make the statement of the appellant correct wherein he has stated that the only ceremony performed was exchange of garlands in the temple of Hanumanji. The appellant is in all the splendour of a bride-groom, on a horse- back and in the Mandap and it cannot be said that it was just a simple marriage of exchange of garlands and nothing more. When Sangeeta was in the witness - box, she was not put any question about exchange of garlands in tempal. of Hanumanji. 23. P.W. 3, Sharvan Lal used to assist Pandit Ramsahai, who was to perform marriage of Sangeeta and Ambe Prasad. He has stated that when they reached the appointed place, namely the house of Sunder Lal, where the marriage was to be performed, they found there was no mandap etc. so Pandit Ram Sahai went away from there and refused to perform the marriage. When he made enquiries, he learnt that the bride-groom had been married earlier, therefore, there was not much pomp and show, therefore, the marriage was performed in the temple of Hanumanji, by exchanging garlands. He is not able to give the particulars about the temple and he has rightly not been believed by the learned District Judge. This witness occasionally meets the appellant and is, therefore, interested in him. 24. He is not able to give the particulars about the temple and he has rightly not been believed by the learned District Judge. This witness occasionally meets the appellant and is, therefore, interested in him. 24. I may again refer to the statement of Pandit Chandra Dhar in order to find out what ceremonies were performed and what is the effect of the ceremonies named by him. The ceremonies which performed at the time of marriage included taking four rounds of the scared fire and performing the ceremonies of HINDI MATTER 377313C This ceremony of 'Vamang Dashapag' according to the learned counsel for the respondent is the same as Saptapadi - stated in different words. The Saptapadi is the taking of seven steps in the north direction and after that the bride changes the side and comes to sit on the left of the bridegroom. According to him the 'Dashapag & Vamang'. as stated by P. W. 4 Pandit Chandra Dhar Sharma is nothing else but the Saptapadi after performing which the 'Vamang' part of the ceremony is done. 'Dashapag'. means taking of steps in a particular direction which is also the essential of Saptapadi. If the appellant was not satisfied about the terms which were used for the purpose of describing the ceremonies of the marriage, he could have got them clarified in the cross-examination. But no question was put to the witness Pandit Chandra Dhar in the respect. He was only cross-examined about his job and the reason for his being present at the time of marriage and the number of persons who were present at the time of marriage. In other words the appellant did not contest the performance of the ceremonies named by the witness. It may be mentioned here that hindu marriages are performed with many essential and unessential ceremonies, the significance of each of which is not explained to the persons who are getting married or are simply watching the marriage being performed. Most of the Shlokas are chanted in Sanskrit which the people are not able to follow . The taking of pheras is generally understood as the performance of marriage and if the same, is done, it is considered that the marriage has been performed. What essentials are performed in a particular marriage would, therefore, be known to the pandit. Most of the Shlokas are chanted in Sanskrit which the people are not able to follow . The taking of pheras is generally understood as the performance of marriage and if the same, is done, it is considered that the marriage has been performed. What essentials are performed in a particular marriage would, therefore, be known to the pandit. who is performing the marriage and in this case the witness Pandit Chandra Dhar Sharma has named the ceremonies performed. Though he has not used the words Saptapdi, the use of which would have eliminated a lot of confusion, he has given a different word Dashapag-Vamang', which can be said to be equivalent to Saptapadi. Taking steps in a particular direction and thereafter the bride's coming to the left of the bride-groom, completes the ceremony of Saptapadi. In the present case steps in a particular direction were taken and the bride and bride-groom changed places, which amount to Saptapadi. Therefore, the performance of marriage was according to hindu rites and customs including Saptapadi and it cannot be said that the marriage was not complete on account of not undergoing the essential ceremonies of the marriage. 25. Learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out certain circumstances, which according to him are abnormal and unnatural and according to him the performance of the ceremonies of marriage should not be taken to be proved. For this purpose, he has drawn my attention to the fact that the Barat in this case did not come from the house of the appellant but from the house of Mridula Kanwar. Secondly, the grand father of respondent Sangeeta, who was an employee of Municipal Council had made enquiries about the appellant. That P.W. 1 Chandra Dhar Sharma was asked to perform the marriage on the spur of the moment which is also very unusual. The other circumstance pointed out is that the father of Sangeeta has not come in the witness-box for which there should be some reason and had he been a witness, he would not have supported the case of the respondent. 26. I have carefully considered these contentions of the appellant and also gone through the evidence produced in the case. The photographs of the marriage, which have been produced, belie all the contentions raised by the appellant. 26. I have carefully considered these contentions of the appellant and also gone through the evidence produced in the case. The photographs of the marriage, which have been produced, belie all the contentions raised by the appellant. He came as a bride-groom, on a horse-back, sat in the mandap for his marriage and merely because the barat procession started from the house of Mridula Kanwar, it will not become a case wherein the fact of marriage should not be believed. The fact that the grand father of the respondent made enquiries but was not able to find out about the earlier marriages of the appellant, will not go to show that the marriage between the parties was not performed at all. It happens in several cases, where parties negotiating for a marriage are not able to find out the complete details of the other side. It is not the appellant's case that the father and grand- father of Sangeeta had agreed to her marriage to the appellant knowing that he was a married man. The fact that P.W. 4 Chandra Dhar Sharma had to deputise as a pandit at the time of the marriage itself when pandit Ramsahai, who had been engaged by Sunderlal did not turn up, or left the place, goes to show that Pandit Ram Sahai must have decided to leave the place on finding out that the bride-groom in this case was the present appellant. The circumstantial evidence does not support the appellant. 27. One of the conditions for a valid marriage under section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act is that neither party to the marriage has a spouse living at the time of marriage. 28. Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act says that any merriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition (presented by either party thereto) against the other party, be so declared by a decree of nullity, if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5. 29. In the present case, sub-clause (i) of section 5 is held to be not fulfilled and the respondent has been granted a declaration that her marriage with the appellant is a nullity. 30. The evidence in respect of the previous marriage of the appellant is to be looked into. 29. In the present case, sub-clause (i) of section 5 is held to be not fulfilled and the respondent has been granted a declaration that her marriage with the appellant is a nullity. 30. The evidence in respect of the previous marriage of the appellant is to be looked into. P.W. 3 Radhey Shyam is the father of Munni Devi, P. W. 5, who is said to be the first wife of Ambe Prasad. He has deposed that his daughter Munni Devi was married to the appellant Ambe Prasad on Jan. 16, 1974 and in 1979 she was turned out of the house. An invitation card of the marriage has been produced, which is Ex. 3. P.W. 5 Munni Devi has supported this by saying that she was married according to Hindu rites and customs and she lived with Ambe Prasad from 1976 to 1979, when she was beaten and turned out of the house by appellant. She has not been separated or divorced Before looking at their cross-examination, the version of appellant Ambe Prasad's to his marriage to Munni Devi may be looked into. He has stated that he used to eat 'pan' at the shop of Radhey Shyam and in this way, he came to know him. Thereafter. he started taking tutions of Munni Devi, who was a student. This continued for about four years during which period they used to visit each other's house. Then he started having illicit relations with Munni Devi. Radhey Shvam insisted on his marrying Munni Devi but he refused to do so as both of them were of the same Gotra. He was asked to pay damages in order to be relieved of Munni Devi and so he paid a sum of Rs. 500/- and also obtained a sort of discharge letter but was not able to find it. Thus he has not totally denied his relationship with Munni Devi. 31. P. W. 3 Radhey Shvam has stated that his friend Shvam Sunder suggested the appellant for his daughter and thereafter, the appellant with his mother had come to see his daughter and after some negotiation, the marriage took place. As the appellant was employed, he (Radhey Shyam) agreed for the marriage. 31. P. W. 3 Radhey Shvam has stated that his friend Shvam Sunder suggested the appellant for his daughter and thereafter, the appellant with his mother had come to see his daughter and after some negotiation, the marriage took place. As the appellant was employed, he (Radhey Shyam) agreed for the marriage. Merely, because lie did not visit the house of the appellant before giving his daughter in marriage to him, it cannot be said that he fact of marriage should be disbelieved. The only suggestion put to him which he has denied, is that his daughter did not tell him that he had been released from the marriage meaning thereby that there has been a divorce or some thing to that effect. The talks for the marriage, engagement all were performed within a period of one month. The appellant tried to malign Munni Devi by saying that she was engaged and married in the year 1972 to some one else and was merely sent with the appellant on some pretext. Thus in other words the appellant admits that Munni Devi had come to stay with him and has not specifically denied the marriage. On the contrary, Munni Devi and her father have proved the same. On basis of the evidence, the marriage of the appellant admits Munni Devi stands proved and he being a married man, could not enter into another valid marriage unless that marriage was dissolved. There is nothing to say that Munni Devi and Ambe Prasad were divorced and so long as this marriage existed the appellant could not have entered into another legal marriage. 32. Before marrying the respondent Sangeeta. Munni Devi is not the only girl, whom the appellant accepted as his wife. He entered into one more marriage with Vidya Devi on 16-6-1981. The invitation card for her marriage is Ex. 2. Her marriage was performed at Bharatpur, where the appellant had come as bride-groom with baraties. They had taken pheras round the scared fire and then she went to live with the appellant at his house in Khajene Walon Ka Rasta, Jaipur. She lived with the appellant for 8-9 days and continued to be on visiting terms for quite some time and has not been divorced. They had taken pheras round the scared fire and then she went to live with the appellant at his house in Khajene Walon Ka Rasta, Jaipur. She lived with the appellant for 8-9 days and continued to be on visiting terms for quite some time and has not been divorced. She has denied that at the time of her marriage, she had a five year old daughter named Sunita and that she was an already married woman. According to her, she was married only to the appellant and to no one else. According to her. Mr. Ansari was D.I.G. (Prisons) and her father was employed in the Bharatpur Jail as Factory Manager and this marriage took place through Mr. Ansari and her father did not make any investigations about the antecedents of the appellant. What is relevent to be considered is whether marriage between appellant and Vidya Devi took place and for proving this the statement of Vidya Devi that the marriage took place with pomp and show and a mandap was prepared and they took rounds of the fire is enough, which is proved by the marriage invitation card also. 33. The idea behind the manner in which the cross-examination has been conducted on behalf of the appellant appears to be that the marriages of appellant with Munni Devi and Vidya Devi were not valid marriages as both of them were previously married and as such they cannot have entered into a valid marriage again. Either this has been done with a view to save himself from the criminal prosecution, which has been launched against him or it is with the desire to malign these girls, it is for the appellant to say, but he has not been able to pro- duce any evidence to show as to who was the person to whom Munni Devi was married and who was the person to whom Vidya Devi was married. There is no reason to disbelieve the statement of these two girls when they have said that they were unmarried at the time of their marriage to the appellant. 34. The method adopted by the appellant Ambe Prasad for maligning the respondent Sangeeta is by saying that she had become pregnant by some one and than Mridula Kanwar approached him to marry her by exchanging garlands. 34. The method adopted by the appellant Ambe Prasad for maligning the respondent Sangeeta is by saying that she had become pregnant by some one and than Mridula Kanwar approached him to marry her by exchanging garlands. According to him he was trying to help Sangeeta by accepting the suggestion of Mridula Kanwar and Kishan Lal, who was like a father to him. It was when Kishan Lal, asked him to accept Sangeeta that he gave his consent and then the marriage was performed at the temple of Hanumanji, In the marriage, Kishanlal and Mridula Kanwar were from his side. He has not given any reason as to why Kishanlal or Mirdula Kanwar were interested in saving the honour of Sangeeta even if it can be believed that she was pregnant and it was necessary to get her married. Why was the appellant chosen every time to rescue the damsels in distress is something he ought to have explained. Ordinarily it cannot be accepted that a man would agree to marry a girl knowing fully well that she is carrying a child in her womb by some other person. These generous and heroic qualities which are being attributed to the appellant are entirely misplaced in view of the evidence which has been produced in this case. Instead of saying the honour of young girl, he has been actually indulging in maligning them by his suggestions in the cross examination. This sort of approach would not go to displace the positive evidence led on behalf of the respondent which unmistakably goes to prove that the appellant was first married to Munni Devi, during the course of subsistence of this marriage he was married to Vidya Devi and again when both marriage subsisted, he married respondent Sangeeta. The decision of the learned District Judge in this respect cannot he said to be incorrect. The evidence has been appreciated by him in detail and if as suggested to the learned counsel for the appellant something has been overlooked by him, then the same has been taken note of by me and there appears to be no reason for coming at a conclusion different from the one arrived at by the learned Distt. Judge. 35. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged that Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act is violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Judge. 35. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged that Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act is violative of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is contended that a marriage can be declared null and void on an application by the parties to the marriage if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5. Referring to these provisions, it is contended that a previous wife cannot invoke the provision of Section 11 and it is only the subsequent wife, who can apply under this Section, therefore, this provision is discriminatory and is violative of the constitution. Before raising such a plea, the appellant ought to have shown that he has been discriminated against in some manner so as to say that in similar circumstances, he has not been given the same rights which are possessed by another. If the right to proceed under Section 11 is available only to a second wife, then it is based on the reasonable classification that at the time of first marriage the condition prescribed under Section 5(i), had been fulfilled and the marriage was valid. It is only after the subsequent marriage that one of the parties has a grievance that the other is already married whose spouse is alive and it is this grievance which gives a right to seek relief. The previous marriage cannot become vaid on account of the subsequent marriage, because at the time it was performed, it was a valid marriage. The previous wife can avail of the remedy of seeking divorce on the ground of subsequent marriage but she cannot get something to be declared illegal from its very inception when at that time it was perfectly valid. 36. The learned counsel for the appellant has next contended that the matter should be cut short and the marriage of the appellant be declared a nullify without giving any finding on the alleged previous marriages. This contention has been raised because proceedings under S 494 Cr. P.C. are pending against the appellant. However, it may he said that there cannot be a consent decree for declaring a marriage a nullity. This contention has been raised because proceedings under S 494 Cr. P.C. are pending against the appellant. However, it may he said that there cannot be a consent decree for declaring a marriage a nullity. There is a provision for passing a decree for divorce on basis of mutual consent but the same cannot be done in the face of a petition for declaring a marriage as nullity on the ground of contravention of condition laid down under sub-section (i) of Section 5. Under Section 23 of the Act, the Court before passing a decree in any proceedings Under the Hindu Marriage Act has to be satisfied that the petitioner is not taking advantage of his/her own wrong, the petitioner has not been accessory to or connived at or condoned the act of adultery or cruelty, consent for mutual divorce has not been obtained by fraud, that there is no collusion in the presentation of the petition etc. The Court can pass a decree if it is satisfied that there is no ground for refusing the decree. A decree is to be passed on legal grounds and a decree declaring marriage a nullity on basis of compromise has no legs to stand upon. However, in the present case there is no mutual consent of the parties declaring the marriage as nullity so proceeding according to the suggestion of the appellant does not arise. 37. The only remedy available to the respondent in the present case was to move a petition under Section 11 of the Act and this has been done by her. The marriage according to her was in violation of condition No. (i) of Section 5 and when the appellant had a previous wife living he could not have entered into a second marriage which means that the second marriage was void from its very inception which is to be declared a nullity. The declaration of nullity of the marriage as made by the lower court deserves to be confirmed. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that his marriage to Vidya Davi cannot be said to be a valid marriage if he was already married to Munni Devi and therefore the finding of the learned lower court that the appellant had entered into two valid marriages before marrying the respondent is incorrect. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that his marriage to Vidya Davi cannot be said to be a valid marriage if he was already married to Munni Devi and therefore the finding of the learned lower court that the appellant had entered into two valid marriages before marrying the respondent is incorrect. It may be mentioned here that the respondent is concerned about the nullity of her own marriage on account of the appellant being a married man at the time of his marriage to the respondent. Her purpose is served the moment she has proved that the appellant had a spouse living at the time of his marriage to her. The spouse may be Munni Devi or Vidya Devi, it makes no difference to her. The marriage of the appellant to Vidya Devi has not been declared illegal so far, so, the purpose of the respondent this is a subsisting marriage. In appropriate proceedings, the appellant may get it declared void or illegal. 38. In these proceedings, it cannot be decided as to what will be the criminal liability of the appellant, as that is the subject matter of a separate petition. For the present, it is suffice to say that condition no. 5 (1) of the Act was not fulfilled, therefore, the marriage of the appellant with the respondent was void and therefore, declaration given by the learned lower Court is proper. 39. In view of my aforementioned findings and the circumstances of the case, this appeal is dismissed with costs, assessed at Rs. 1,000.Appeal Dismissed With Cost. *******