Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 517 (MP)

Anguri Bai v. Kishore Kumar Aasar

2014-05-05

R.S.JHA

body2014
ORDER 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/plaintiff being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 30.11.2012 passed by the First Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court) Burhanpur, in Civil Appeal No.22-A/2012 affirming and confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.1.2012 passed by the First Civil Judge Class-II, Burhanpur, in Civil Suit No.33-A/2009 whereby the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for being declared as a legally wedded wife of the respondent/Madhusudan has been dismissed. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the Courts below have dismissed the suit of the appellant by recording a finding to the effect that the appellant was previously married to one Prahlad and there is no legal proof of divorce between them and in the absence of the same, the status of a wife of the deceased respondent/ Madhusudan cannot be conferred upon the appellant. It is further submitted that the Court below have failed to take into consideration the fact that the appellant had pleaded that there was a custom in the Buddh community for granting oral divorce which fact coupled with the consent letter Ex.P/12 filed by Prahlad to the effect that he had given divorce to the appellant clearly establishes the fact that the subsequent marriage of the appellant to the deceased respondent/Madhusudan was valid and in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the Courts below have failed to consider documents Ex.P/12, the consent letter, Ex.P/3 the document recognizing marriage and the notice Ex.P/5 and has thereby committed perversity by recording a concurrent finding against the appellant. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, it is observed that the case of the appellant is based on a claim of a prevailing custom in the Buddh community of granting divorce orally. However, the appellant has failed to adduce any evidence to prove and establish such a custom. 4. Quite apart from the above, it is clear from a perusal of the record that the deceased respondent/Madhusudan did not belong to the Buddh community and in such circumstances there is also lack of any pleading or proof regarding applicability of the Buddh custom if any upon the deceased respondent/Madhusudan. 4. Quite apart from the above, it is clear from a perusal of the record that the deceased respondent/Madhusudan did not belong to the Buddh community and in such circumstances there is also lack of any pleading or proof regarding applicability of the Buddh custom if any upon the deceased respondent/Madhusudan. It is also clear that the Courts below have extensively discussed Ex.P/12, Ex.P/3 and Ex.P/5 and have recorded a finding to the effect that the appellant was not divorced and was still married to Prahlad and in such circumstances, the status of a wife of the deceased respondent/Madhusudan cannot be conferred upon the appellant and therefore, the findings recorded by the Courts below cannot be found faulted with. The concurrent finding recorded by the Courts below is based on proper assimilation of oral and documentary evidence on record which does not suffer from any perversity in the absence of any proved custom. 5. In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any substantial question of law arising for adjudication in the present appeal. The appeal being meritless is accordingly dismissed.