- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) Appellant is aggrieved by the dismissal of Original Suit (M.T.S. No. 21 of 2007) by the judgment dated 4.1.2016 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi, whereunder the Suit for declaration of his marriage with respondent No.1 as valid and further to declare his alleged relationship with respondent No.2 as void ab initio, has been dismissed.
(3.) Plaintiff/Appellant pleaded before the learned family court that petitioner and both the respondents are members of the Scheduled Tribe community and they are governed by Oraon Customary Law. They are also governed by Hindu customary Law for the purposes of marriage and other social meets. Marriage with respondent no. 1 was solemnized on 8.2.1992 as per Hindu rites and customs, out of which, five children named therein have been born. The name of respondent no.1 is entered, as nominee, in his service record under the Life Insurance Corporation. His marriage with respondent no.1 was registered on 24.5.2006 vide Certificate No. 44 of 2006. He alleges that suddenly he received a notice of Maintenance Case no. 77 of 1992 filed by respondent no.2, u/s 125 Cr.P.C. claiming herself to be his wife. She claimed her marriage with him in the year 1986 and birth of a female child on 11.10.1992. Petitioner denied the claim but learned judicial magistrate, Ranchi by order dated 3.9.1997 allowed the maintenance case. Criminal revision preferred by him was dismissed with modification of quantum of maintenance by the 5 th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi. He stated that in Oraon community, marriage is not solemnized at the age of 8 years for the girl and 14 years for the boy. As per respondent no.2's statement, she was only 8 years of age at the time of the marriage. He denied the marriage or birth of the child out of any wedlock with her. He further pleaded that on the application of respondent no.2, the learned Family Court has attached his salary and directed the employer to deduct Rs. 5,000/- per month. He filed W.P.(C) No. 5407 of 2006 before this Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 5.12.2006. He pleaded that respondent no.1 is his legally married wife and there is no relationship with respondent no.2. As such he sought declaration that there is no relationship between him and respondent no.2 and that it is void ab initio.;