JUDGMENT : MAULIK J.SHELAT, J. 1. Both these appeals are filed under Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984 (herein after referred as the Act, 1984) arising out of the common judgment and decree passed by Principal Judge at Palanpur, Family Court, District Banaskantha in Family Suit no. 33 of 2020 and Family Suit No.17 of 2021 respectively. 2. The parties to the appeal are appellant - wife and respondent - husband who have solemnized their marriage on 06.12.2019 according to Hindu rites and rituals and their marriage was registered on 10.12.2019. After sometime, the dispute started between the couple, which eventually broken their matrimonial life, whereby wife has left her matrimonial home, which has resulted into filing of Family Suit No.33 of 2020 by husband – respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1955”) for obtaining restitution of conjugal rights. Likewise, the appellant – wife has also preferred a suit as Family Suit No. 17 of 2021, albeit, under the Act, 1955 for obtaining decree of divorce from the respondent – husband. Both these suits appear to have been consolidated and decided by way of impugned common judgment. We also would like to decide lis between the parties by way of this common judgement. 3. The common evidence appears to have been led wherein following oral and documentary evidence submitted by the respective parties. Sr. No. Oral and Documentary Evidence Ex.No. 1. Deposition of plaintiff. 23 2. True copy of marriage certificate of parties. 25 3. True copy of affidavit of defendant before notary public. 26 4. True copy of complaint filed by defendant before Mahila Police Station, Palanpur. 27 5. True copy of complaint given by defendant to D.S.P., Palanpur. 28 6. Copy of defendant's statement in Mahila Police Station, Palanpur. 29 7. Copy of statement of Rameshpuri (defendant's father) in Mahila Police Station, Palanpur. 30 8. Copy of statement of Shilpaben (defendant's mother) in Mahila Police Station, Palanpur. 31 9. Copy of statement of Bhanuben (defendant's aunt) in Mahila Police Station, Palanpur. 32 10 Copy of defendant's statement in Palanpur city east police station. 33 11. Copy of written application given by plaintiff at Palanpur city west police station. 34 12 Copy of written application given by plaintiff at Palanpur city west police station. 35 13 Copy of interim order passed in R/CRIMINAL MISC. 32 10 Copy of defendant's statement in Palanpur city east police station. 33 11. Copy of written application given by plaintiff at Palanpur city west police station. 34 12 Copy of written application given by plaintiff at Palanpur city west police station. 35 13 Copy of interim order passed in R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.14716/2020 in Hon. Gujarat High Court on dtd. 08/10/2020. 36 14 Copy of interim order passed in R/CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.14716/2020 in Hon. Gujarat High Court on dtd. 28/10/2020. 37 15. Copy of rent agreement of plaintiff. 38 16. 60 Photographs of parties. 39 17. Copy of CRMA No.627/2020 (637/2020) filed by plaintiff before the Hon. Gujarat High Court to quash the F.I.R. No. 114/2019 filed in the Palanpur City Police Station 40 18. Copy of plaintiff's reply in case filed against him i F.I.R. No.45/2014 in Deodar police station. 41 19. Copy of written application given by plaintiff to D.A.F Banaskantha. 42 20. Copy of acknowledgment receipt. 43 21 Deposition of witness, Montukumar Shankarbh Thakor. 48 22. Copy of divorce deed executed between plaintiff an his first wife, Manjulaben. 62 23 Depostion of defendant 51 24 Deposition of witness, Rameshpur Manipur Goswami 54 25 Deposition of witness, Shilpaben Rameshpur Goswami 56 4. The issues were framed at Exh. 22 which have been answered by the Family Court which reads as under:- “(1) Whether the plaintiff-husband proves that he is the legally wedded husband of the defendant-wife? (2) Whether the plaintiff-husband proves that the defendant-wife has deserted him from the society without any reasonable cause as alleged in the petition? (3) Whether the plaintiff-husband proves that the defendant-wife is living separately from him and she is liable to stay with her husband and fulfil conjugal rights of marriage? (4) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is not legally wedded wife of plaintiff-husband? (5) Whether the defendant-wife proves that plaintiff committed fraud wit her and created false evidence of marriage by threat and cheating? (6) Whether the plaintiff-husband proves that he is entitled to get the decree for restitution of conjugal rights? (7) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is entitled to get the decree of divorce or nullity of marriage as prayed for? (8) What order and decree? 10. My answer to the above issues are as follows:- (1) In the affirmative. (2) In the affirmative. (3) In the affirmative. (4) In the negative. (7) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is entitled to get the decree of divorce or nullity of marriage as prayed for? (8) What order and decree? 10. My answer to the above issues are as follows:- (1) In the affirmative. (2) In the affirmative. (3) In the affirmative. (4) In the negative. (5) In the negative. (6) In the affirmative. (7) In the negative. (8) As per final order.” 5. After appreciating the evidence on record and hearing both the sides, the Family Court vide its impugned judgment and decree has allowed Family Suit No. 33 of 2020 by respondent – husband, whereas Family Suit No. 17 of 2021 filed by appellant wife has been rejected. 6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and decree passed in aforesaid suits, the appellant – wife has preferred the present appeals. 7. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties at length and gone through the records and proceedings as well as paper book in both the appeals. 8. After going through the record, it has come on record that respondent – husband is already married prior to solemnization of marriage with appellant on 06.12.2019. It has also come on record that husband – respondent had executed the deed of divorce with her first wife, namely, Manjulaben Parmar on 21.12.2017, which was produced at Exh. 62. 9. We have gone through the divorce deed executed between the respondent – husband with her first wife, namely, Manjulaben Parmar. The respondent – husband has not secured decree of divorce from the competent Court of his first marriage as nothing has come out during the course of trial before the Family Court that there was custom prevailing in the society of husband to get divorce by execution of such deed. In absence of any such valid decree of divorce in favour of respondent - husband, his marriage with appellant is ex facie void in light of Section 5 (i) read with Section 11 of the Act, 1955. 10. One of the issue which was framed i.e., issue no.4, and the same was answered in negative by the Family Court, reads as under:- “(4) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is not legally wedded wife of plaintiff-husband? (7) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is entitled to get the decree of divorce or nullity of marriage as prayed for? ” 11. (7) Whether the defendant-wife proves that she is entitled to get the decree of divorce or nullity of marriage as prayed for? ” 11. We have gone through the reasons, which are assigned by the Family Court while answering issue No.4 in para 15 and 16 of its impugned judgment. We are at a loss sight that how Family Court can justify and give its approval to deed of divorce executed between two individuals as a valid divorce in the eye of law. 12. The Family Court has gone completely on a wrong footing while answering issue no.4, which has resulted into miscarriage of justice. It is now well settled that after coming into force of the Act, 1955, unless there is a custom prevailing in the society of a couple, spouse (legally wedded husband & wife) can not be legally separated and or get divorce by way of execution of any deed of divorce may be notarized. Even if, such practice prevailing in the society unknowingly to the provision of law, no Court can certify it by giving its approval.We deprecate such practice and also not in agreement with the view of the Family Court certifying such deed in the facts of the present case as valid divorce in eye of law. 13. Ex facie, when the first marriage of respondent – husband was subsist while solemnizing another marriage with appellant on 06.12.2019, solemnization of the marriage of respondent with appellant is null and void as per the aforesaid provisions of the Act, 1955. 14. Thus, according to this Court, the issues as referred hereinabove, need to be answered in favour of the wife thereby, we hold that she is not legally wedded wife of respondent-husband as the first marriage of respondent husband was in existence at the time of her marriage. 15. The upshot of the said discussions, leads to only one conclusion that marriage, which was solemnized between the parties on 06.12.2019 is null and void, which entitled the appellant to get decree of divorce in her favour, we hereby hold that appellant’s marriage is not valid in the eye of law as its nullity. 16. 15. The upshot of the said discussions, leads to only one conclusion that marriage, which was solemnized between the parties on 06.12.2019 is null and void, which entitled the appellant to get decree of divorce in her favour, we hereby hold that appellant’s marriage is not valid in the eye of law as its nullity. 16. In view of the aforesaid discussions, our observations and findings, the Family Suit No.33 of 2020 filed by respondent - husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is hereby dismissed and Family Suit No. 17 of 2021 filed by appellant – wife to get decree of divorce is hereby allowed. 17. Thus, the marriage of the appellant and respondent is hereby dissolved forthwith and decree of divorce be drawn accordingly. 18. The appellant - wife is not praying for any kind of alimony from respondent husband. So, we are not inclined to grant any permenant alimony to wife. 19. At this Stage, learned advocate Mr. Nasir Saiyed for respondent - husband pointed out to the Court that appellant – wife has filed Criminal Complaint against respondent – husband and first wife Manjulaben Parmar under Section 376 etc. of Indian Penal Code. 20. Learned Advocate Mr. Mahendra Vora for the appellant under the instruction of her client has assured and undertake to the Court that appellant – wife will not pursue her complaint, which is so mentioned in para 5 of her suit and necessary consent for quashing of such complaint will be tendered by her unconditionally in a case, where any petition for consent quashing filed by respondent including co-accused before this Court. 21. The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. Resultantly, Civil Applications are also disposed of accordingly. 22. Records and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the Family Court forthwith.