Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 639 (AP)

B. Suryakantham v. B. S. Vidhya Sagar @ Raju

2013-08-08

L.NARASIMHA REDDY, S.V.BHATT

body2013
JUDGMENT : L. Narasimha Reddy, J. Both the appeals are between the same parties and are filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. Hence, they are disposed of through a common judgment. The sole respondent in both the appeals filed O.S.No.119 of 1995 before the Family Court, Hyderabad, with a prayer to declare that no valid or legal marriage has taken place or is subsisting between himself and the appellant, and that the certificate of marriage dated 01-03-1989, issued by the Registrar of Marriages, Hyderabad, is null and void. He pleaded that himself and the appellant are members of the same political party, and that he functioned as Chairman of Hindupur Municipality, in the year 1989. According to him, the familiarity between himself and the appellant has developed during the party meetings, and the appellant used to represent to him, that both of them can marry, since they belong to the same community, and that he can help her from coming out of the control of one Mr. Ramakrishna Reddy. He stated that the said Ramakrishna Reddy has spread rumor to the effect that the marriage between himself and the appellant took place on 26-12-1988, and that a letter has been extracted from him, to that effect, under coercion. He stated that on 30-12-1988 itself the appellant wrote him a letter, expressing regrets over the events, that have taken place on 26-12-1988. The respondent has also pleaded that the appellant represented to him that her father is suffering from serious ailment and developed mental agony on account of the news about the alleged marriage, and that his health can be restored, if a certificate of marriage is produced, and accordingly asked him to sign on a letter addressed to the Registrar of Marriages. He stated that in the process, a certificate of marriage was procured on 01-03-1989. The gist of the contention of the respondent was that himself and the appellant belong to Hindu religion, that too, Brahmin community, and there are stipulated norms and customs, such as Saptapadi, conducting of Homam, etc., for a marriage, and none of the rituals have been followed in their case. He stated that at no point of time himself and the appellant have lived as husband and wife, and that his marriage was fixed at the relevant point of time, with, one Usha. He stated that at no point of time himself and the appellant have lived as husband and wife, and that his marriage was fixed at the relevant point of time, with, one Usha. He has also stated that the appellant herself addressed many letters, stating that she has no objection for the marriage between the respondent and Usha. It was also the plea of the respondent that while taking the signature on certain papers, with a view to obtain marriage certificate, the appellant promised that she would take all the steps to get a declaration to the effect that no marriage has taken place between them, and as per legal advices, they have to wait at least for six months, from the date of the alleged marriage. He stated that the appellant changed her mind and did not extend cooperation to seek a declaration in that behalf. The appellant filed a written-statement, opposing the suit. She stated that the marriage between herself and the respondent took place in her flat, on 26-12-1988 and that the same has been recognized through the marriage certificate, dated 01-03-1989. She stated that she has no connection or relation whatever with Ramakrishna Reddy. She has also denied the contents of the letter dated 30-12-1988, said to have been addressed by her. The allegation as to the circumstances, that led to obtaining of marriage certificate, or her promise to get a declaration to the effect that there was no marriage, have also been denied. The appellant pleaded that when she fell sick, the respondent looked after her, with love and affection. The appellant has also stated that the customs prevalent in their community, for marriage, have been followed, and that the suit filed by the respondent is not maintainable. She made reference to certain letters, said to have been addressed by the respondent in the years 1989 and 1990, and pleaded that he approved of the marriage, and that the suit is liable to be dismissed. Almost, at the same time, the appellant filed O.P.No.250 of 1995 in the same Court, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), for the relief of restitution of conjugal rights. The parties have virtually repeated their pleadings in O.S.No.119 of 1995. The respondent opposed the O.P., stating that there is no subsisting of marriage between himself and the appellant. The parties have virtually repeated their pleadings in O.S.No.119 of 1995. The respondent opposed the O.P., stating that there is no subsisting of marriage between himself and the appellant. The trial Court clubbed both the suits and recorded common evidence. Through a common judgment dated 30-06-1998, the trial Court decreed O.S.No.119 of 1995 and dismissed O.P.No.250 of 1995. Hence, these two appeals are filed by the appellant. Sri K.S.R. Murthy, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the trial Court committed error in declaring that no marriage has taken place between the parties herein. He contends that the respondent did not dispute the event, that has taken place on 26-12-1988, or the existence of the marriage certificate dated 01-03-1989, issued on the basis of a letter/affidavit signed by both the parties. He contends that the suit itself was filed five years after the marriage, and the oral and documentary evidence on record clearly demonstrated that the marriage, which is valid in law, has taken place between the parties. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon certain precedents, in support of his contentions, and submits that the judgments and decrees passed by the trial Court, in both the suits, deserve to be set aside. Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the so-called marriage has been stage managed by one Mr. Ramakrishna Reddy, with a view to project a picture that he does not have any relation with the appellant, and that the marriage certificate was obtained by the appellant, almost by pleading mercy, in relation to the ill-health of her father. He contends that the letters addressed by the appellant, from time to time, clearly demonstrate that no marriage has taken place, and that on every occasion, she expressed her regrets for the inconvenience and ignominy suffered by the respondent. It is urged that Section 7 of the Act mandates that a marriage would be complete, if only the rituals, stipulated by the concerned community, are complete, and that Saptapadi, which is essential and important step in the marriage in their community, did not take place between the parties herein. He too relied upon certain precedents, and urged that the judgments and decrees passed by the trial Court are based on sound reasoning and legal principles; and do not warrant interference. He too relied upon certain precedents, and urged that the judgments and decrees passed by the trial Court are based on sound reasoning and legal principles; and do not warrant interference. On the basis of the pleadings before it, the trial Court framed the following issues for its consideration: 1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for declaration as sought for? 2. Whether the suit is not maintainable in view of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995 and whether the Court has got jurisdiction to try the suit? On behalf of the respondent, PWs 1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-58 were filed. On behalf of the appellant, DWs 1 to 3 were examined, and Exs.B-1 to B-32 were filed. In addition to that, one Mr. M.S.A. Siraz, working in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Hyderabad, was examined as a Court witness. The trial Court decreed O.S.No.119 of 1995 and dismissed O.P.No.250 of 1995. Now, the points, that arise for consideration, are, as to, a) whether a valid marriage has taken place between the appellant and the respondent; b) whether the respondent made out a case for declaration, as prayed for by him; and c) whether any relief can be granted to the appellant under Section 9 of the Act. Point Nos. 1 & 2: The relationship between the appellant and the respondent has several peculiarities and extraordinary features. The respondent is a politician and at one point of time, held the office of the Chairman of Hindupur Municipality, whereas the appellant is said to be a Government employee. However, both of them are said to be the active members of a political party. It is the common case of both of them that they used to interact during the party meetings. It is not uncommon that quite large number of persons gather in party meetings, but the relationship between the appellant and the respondent has grown to be some-what typical. The version of the respondent was that the appellant was closely associated with one, Ramakrishna Reddy, of the same party, and to get rid of her, he floated a rumor of marriage between the appellant and the respondent, on 26-12-1988; and pamphlets to that effect were distributed, in and around the MLA quarters. The version of the respondent was that the appellant was closely associated with one, Ramakrishna Reddy, of the same party, and to get rid of her, he floated a rumor of marriage between the appellant and the respondent, on 26-12-1988; and pamphlets to that effect were distributed, in and around the MLA quarters. Had this not been followed, by any denial, by either party, there would have been every likelihood to believe that there is tacit acceptance of the event, by both of them. The appellant addressed a letter dated 30-12-1988, marked as Ex.A-1, to the respondent. The gist of it is that she expressed her deep regrets for what has happened on 26-12-1988, and according to her, the incident was enacted by the then Minister, Sri Narse Gouda and Sri Ramachandra Reddy, to damage the political image of the respondent and to blackmail him. Ramakrishna Reddy is said to have extending his helping hand for all this. She has also stated that all of them have threatened and coerced her and obtained some written statements. She requested the respondent not to get disturbed, on account of the same, and not to express any concern, whatever be the propaganda spread against him. It is also stated that the propaganda, which is being undertaken in the MLA quarters, is likely to create differences within the family members of the respondent, and that she requested him to explain the facts to the family members. She repeatedly sought pardon, not only of the respondent, but also of his family members. At the end of the letter, she once again stated that unfounded rumors should not be believed. Had the episode stopped at this, the matter would not have taken serious turns. The appellant approached the respondent in February 1989, and is said to have requested him to sign on a common application, for grant of marriage certificate. The reason said to have pleaded by her is that, her parents are very much disturbed, in particular her father is suffering serious mental agony, on account of the rumor, and the only way to put an end to that controversy is to make them believe, that the marriage has taken place and a certificate of marriage would be helpful. The reason said to have pleaded by her is that, her parents are very much disturbed, in particular her father is suffering serious mental agony, on account of the rumor, and the only way to put an end to that controversy is to make them believe, that the marriage has taken place and a certificate of marriage would be helpful. The respondent pleaded that the appellant had promised him to get a proper declaration to the effect that there is no marriage between them, once the certificate of marriage is issued, and accordingly his signatures were obtained on certain blank papers, and thereafter, a marriage certificate, Ex.B-25, dated 01-03-1989, was obtained. The affidavit and letter submitted before the Registrar are filed as Exs.B-12 and B-13. The marriage certificate, if granted on the basis of proper representation, would certainly vouch for the contents thereof. If, however, the procurement is shrouded in mystery, the matter needs a close scrutiny. PW-2 is said to be one of the witnesses to the marriage. Though in his chief-examination he stated that he was present at the time of marriage and registration thereof, his credibility was substantially eroded in the cross-examination. Initially, he feigned ignorance about the complaint submitted by the appellant, against the respondent, in the Court of XXII Metropolitan Magistrate. However, it was elicited from PW-2 that he is one of the witnesses in CC.No.858 of 1998 in that Court, and deposed on behalf of the appellant, and against the respondent. He has also stated that though both the spouses must appear before the Registrar, for certification, the respondent was not accompanied by the appellant when she went to the office of the Sub-Registrar. PW-2 further stated that the Sub-Registrar did not record the statement of any witnesses, nor does he know the particulars of other witnesses. He has also stated that he does not remember the date of which, the appellant and the respondent are married, and on 26-12-1988 he attended his office, between 10:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. PW-2 stated that he does not know whether Ex.B-12 was filed by the respondent, before the Sub-Registrar. It was also suggested that the appellant alone filed the documents before the Sub-Registrar. Ex.B-12 is the affidavit, said to have been submitted by the appellant and the respondent. It is signed by the parties on 04-01-1989. It was also suggested that the appellant alone filed the documents before the Sub-Registrar. Ex.B-12 is the affidavit, said to have been submitted by the appellant and the respondent. It is signed by the parties on 04-01-1989. However, the stamp paper, on which it is typed is purchased on 07-01-1989. Ex.B-13 is a letter of the same day. In the first paragraph of the letter it is written, "but, due to ignorance of the rules, the said marriage could not be got registered with the concerned Registering Authority of Marriages, in time". It is on the strength of Exs.B-12 and B-13, that Ex.B-25 was issued. It is also pertinent to mention that Ex.B-25 is a certified copy, and original was not filed. A certificate like, Ex.B-25, can only certify an incident, that has already taken place. By itself, it does not bring about a marriage, just as a sale deed can bring about a sale. Both the parties are Hindus, that too Brahmins. Both of them have stated in their pleadings as well as in their evidence that Saptapadi is one of the essential requirements of a valid marriage in their community. There is any amount of doubt about the place of marriage and the manner in which, it was performed. The appellant stated that the marriage took place in her flat. The respondent pleaded that neither any marriage has taken place, nor Saptapadi was conducted between himself and the appellant. The latter, however, pleaded that the marriage took place, according to the relevant customs. Section 7 of the Act mandates that a valid marriage can take place only on performance of the ceremonies, that are prevalent in the particular community, to which the parties belong. A Division Bench of the Madras High Court in V.D. GRAHALAKSHMI v. T. PRASHANTH (AIR 2012 Madras 34) emphasized the need to prove the compliance with customary rites and ceremonies for a valid marriage between two Hindus. The rites and ceremonies of a particular community, or sects, or the persons belonging to the same community and sect, but living at various places, may differ. However, once the rites and ceremonies for a valid marriage, for a particular sect, professing Hinduism, and living at a particular place, are ascertained, the party, that insists that its marriage has taken place with the other; must prove that they have been followed. However, once the rites and ceremonies for a valid marriage, for a particular sect, professing Hinduism, and living at a particular place, are ascertained, the party, that insists that its marriage has taken place with the other; must prove that they have been followed. It has already been pointed out that the evidence in this behalf is too scanty, and the appellant was not consistent. In the same judgment, their Lordships took the view that mere registration does not provide proof of marriage. In SEEMA v. ASHWANI KUMAR (2006) 2 SCC 578 ), their Lordships of the Supreme Court observed, "...If the marriage is registered it also provides evidence of the marriage having taken place and would provide a rebuttable presumption of the marriage having taken place. Though, the registration itself cannot be a proof of valid marriage per se, and would not be the determinative factor regarding validity of a marriage, yet it has a great evidentiary value in the matters of custody of children, right of children born from the wedlock..." Sri K.S.R. Murthy, learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court, in RAM SINGH AND OTHERS v. COL. RAM SINGH (1985 (Supp) SCC 611), wherein the principles of evidence were pertaining to evidence, recorded through tapes were explained. We are of the view that none of the principles laid therein have any direct application to the facts of the present case. This is a typical case, in which the appellant has undertaken extensive correspondence through letters, with the respondent. The documentary evidence comprises about 15 to 20 letters, apart from the extracts of the alleged telephonic conversation, photographs, etc. Reference has already been made to Ex.A-1, which was the letter, written by the appellant, to the respondent, two days after the alleged marriage. Thereafter, extensive correspondence has been undertaken. Ex.A-2 is one such letter. In this, as in many other letters, the appellant stated that she has used the respondent for her selfish needs, and has become responsible for spoiling of his bright political career, and expressed regrets for whatever has happened. At the threshold of the letter, she wrote, "I do not want to spoil your life for my selfish needs. I would give in writing that there is no relationship between you and me. You do not have to come to me. At the threshold of the letter, she wrote, "I do not want to spoil your life for my selfish needs. I would give in writing that there is no relationship between you and me. You do not have to come to me. What all I need is that you must marry a girl of your choice and lead a happy life. I am prepared to give anything in writing in the manner as you wish. If necessary I am prepared to consult an advocate and even give divorce. I would ensure that you are not subjected to any suffering on account of me". The letter is fairly long, and it concludes with the following sentence: "I pray the Almighty that you should live happily with your wife and children and to bless you with health and prosperity". The text of the said letter resembles the narration in a typical novel. It is a different matter that the appellant changed her stance in her subsequent letters, or approach. She even addressed a detailed letter to the sister of the respondent, in the year 1990. At one place, she stated, "...I kept our marriage very secret. I did not show my husband to anyone. You know what sort of rumors were spread in your village. If it is alleged that your brother has left me, will the society permit me to live. Our entire family has to commit suicide..." At the end of the letter the appellant has only desired that the respondent can reside at Hindupur and she would live in Hyderabad, and even that was not happily agreed to by the family members. She further stated that the respondent has been punished by his family members for his loving her, i.e. the appellant, and on account of that, he has suffered mental agony. The appellant further stated that, "let everything take place according to the wishes of your brother, and I am prepared to reconcile to that". These are the only small bits from the extensive correspondence. If, in fact, there is a valid marriage between the appellant and the respondent, the tone and tenor of the appellant would have been different, and nowhere in the correspondence or other places, she has asserted that any valid marriage has taken place between them. These are the only small bits from the extensive correspondence. If, in fact, there is a valid marriage between the appellant and the respondent, the tone and tenor of the appellant would have been different, and nowhere in the correspondence or other places, she has asserted that any valid marriage has taken place between them. The marriage in Indian context is a bond, which is supposed to remain for the rest of the lives of the spouses. It is more a meeting of hearts and strengthening of relations between two persons, than a contract, being brought into existence, through documents. Ceremonies are prescribed to invoke the divine and celestial powers, aimed at defining the relations, that are going to remain and continue, once the marriage takes place. Over the passage of time and under the influence of modernity, the importance of ceremonies has been reduced to a substantial extent. Even in such a reduced form, there are certain important rites and ceremonies, which the respective communities practice. If the persons are living happily and recognized each of them as the spouse of the other, no problem as such would arise, even if there is any lapse in the conducting of ceremonies. However, once a serious dispute arises in this regard, a close scrutiny becomes necessary. In the instant case, the parties hail from orthodox families and the respondent has earned prominence by becoming the Chairman of a Municipality. It is just unbelievable that his marriage has taken place in such a slipshod, secret and clandestine manner. The learned Judge of the trial Court has taken the trouble of analyzing each and every piece of oral and documentary evidence, and to pinpoint their relevance with reference to the issue of controversy. Since the decree is going to result in defining the relations between the two persons, that too, to the dislike of a woman spouse, elaborate exercise was undertaken to support the findings with proper reasoning, and thereby, excluding even the remote possibility of the conclusions, being bereft of reasons. We too have scrutinized the evidence, closely, and are in total agreement with the findings recorded by the trial Court. Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative, and Point 2, in the negative. Point No.3: In view of the answers to points 1 and 2, the invariable answer to Point No.3 would be in the negative. We too have scrutinized the evidence, closely, and are in total agreement with the findings recorded by the trial Court. Point No.1 is answered in the affirmative, and Point 2, in the negative. Point No.3: In view of the answers to points 1 and 2, the invariable answer to Point No.3 would be in the negative. We do not find any basis to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. The miscellaneous petitions filed in these appeals shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.