MAHADEVI Vs. NAGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an unsuccessful plaintiff's Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree dated 26.07.2014 made in R.A. No. 2/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bailhongal, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.11.1998 made in O.S. No. 64/1993 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Bailhongal, declaring that the defendant is not legally wedded wife of the plaintiff and there is no relationship between the plaintiff and defendant and granted permanent injunction restraining from claiming and posing herself as wife of the plaintiff and adopting the name of the plaintiff as her husband for any purpose.

(2.) It is the case of the plaintiff that he is a permanent resident of Vannur and formerly he was serving as a Teacher in Education Department and after attending the superannuation retired from the service in the year 1980 and he had married on Basalingavva daughter of Channappa Gurannaver of Sanikop Village in the year 1955 at Bailwed Varti and they have led marital life as husband and wife and they discharging their matrimonial relationship. The plaintiff comes from a respectable family and he had possessed property and the wife of the plaintiff is taking care of the plaintiff during his old age. The people of the entire village are known that the plaintiff is the husband of Smt. Basalingavva and they are husband and wife. The defendant who is the resident of Vannur Village has given in marriage to a person of Naganur and her husband is a resident of Hossur village and the defendant is legally wedded wife of her husband Rudrappa Dharnappgol of Naganur Village. The defendant was not having good character leading matrimonial life out of her marital life she has given birth to her child in the year 1991 and there is no relationship in between the plaintiff and defendant in any manner and the child is not born for the plaintiff and defendant at the instigation of ill -wishers of the plaintiff claiming to be the wife of the plaintiff filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Bailhongal in RTS/AP 184/92 -93 styling herself as wife of the plaintiff Defendant is not the wife of the plaintiff. She is falsely claiming to be the wife of the plaintiff and no rights over the properties of the plaintiff. Therefore, plaintiff constrained to institute the present suit against the defendant for declaration to declare that the defendant is not the legally wedded wife of the plaintiff and for consequential relief of injunction from claiming and possession herself as the wife of the plaintiff and adopting the name of the plaintiff as her husband.

(3.) The defendant filed written statement denied the plaint averments and admitted that plaintiff is permanent resident of Vannur and retired from service and she is resident of Vannur Village and denied the alleged marriage between plaintiff and Basalingavva in the year 1955 and contended that she is the first legally wedded wife of the plaintiff and her marriage was solemnized at Vannur Village, Basavanna temple as per their customs and rituals about five years back in the presence of the elders. She is coming from the poor family and their marriage was solemnized in a simple manner and after marriage, defendant went to the house of the plaintiff to lead marital life and out of their marital relationship, she delivered a male child and the plaintiff and defendant discharged their matrimonial relationship. The plaintiff is a simple tone and innocent man and he is hearing to the advise of others and at the instance of ill -wishers of the defendant, he has filed false suit etc. Therefore, she prayed for dismissal of the suit.