BHAGWATI PRASAD SHIVHARE Vs. SANYOG JAISWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the order dated 3.10.2017 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Satna allowing the application under Order 1, Rule 10 (4) read with Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC joining the applicants/petitioners as party to the proceedings being parents of respondent no. 2.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the suit was filed for annulment of the marriage under section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The marriage was solemnized in between husband (respondent No. 1) and wife (respondent No. 2). The said annulment may be either on the ground that the marriage has not been consummated owing to impotency and the marriage is in contravention of the conditions specified in clause (ii) of section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The ground raised for annulment is one of the ground specified in clause (ii) of Section 5 of the Act but for declaration of the said marriage as voidable, the parents of the girl cannot be said to be either necessary or proper party in a case to complete adjudication and settle all the questions involved. In addition, it is urged that the application has been filed after two years High Court of Madhya Pradesh of filing of the suit at a belated stage after commencement of the trial, that too is not permissible without liberty of hearing to the petitioners.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel representing the respondent submits that looking to the pleadings made in para-21 of the plaint filed by the respondent No. 1, the parents by misrepresentation solemnized the marriage, therefore, they are the necessary party of the present case, however, trial Court has rightly allowed the application by the order impugned to which interference by this Court in exercise of the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not warranted.