Admitted position in this case is that the Petitioner/ Defendant has claimed that the Plaintiff/ opposite party married her according to Hindu rites and customs on 17.01.2001 which has been denied in the averment made by the Plaintiff in T.S. No. 60 of 2005. A similar question was dealt with by this Hon'ble Court in the case of Tapash Kumar Moitra v. Pratima Roy Chowdhury, reported in MANU/WB/0504/1984 : 89 CWN 671. It was a suit for declaration that the appropriate registration of Hindu marriage was null and void and the record of such registration should be cancelled, deleted and expunged from the relevant marriage register and the declaration given by the Plaintiff upon which the marriage was registered be declared null and void. In dealing with the matter it was held by the Hon'ble Court that the suit is simply for cancellation of the appropriate registration of the alleged marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Hindu Marriage Registration Rules, 1958 and consequential reliefs. If it is the averment that marriage has not been solemnized then the registration under Section 8 of the said Act read with relevant provisions of the said Rules by itself will not result in making the marriage complete and binding between the parties. Such registration may raise presumption of marriage being solemnized. In such a case the plaint cannot be considered to be a petition under Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act and as such the Civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain such prayer.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
C.O. No. 1323 of 2009
Decided On: 16.08.2011
Pratima Maity Vs. Sujit Maity
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.K. Chakraborty, J.
Citation: MANU/WB/0605/2011
