Babui Panmato Kuer vs Ram Agya Singh

High Court of Patna, dated February 18, 1967

AIR 1968 PAT 190

Honorable Judge: G.N. Prasad.

Ratio: Decidendi (the judgment of the upper court is binding and must
be followed by the lower courts)

“Spouses or any party to the marriage shall be entitled to dissolution of

marriage if the consent is acquired fraudulently.” When two parties hide
or misrepresent important facts related to a contract (in this case
marriage), then this hidden information results in a breach of contract or
dispute between the parties. Hidden information or partial information
violates the free consent right of a party.

Brief Facts:

The petitioner who is a little above the age of 18, overhears her parents
talking about the groom being a wealthy person of the age 25-30 years.
She gave her implied acceptance to the marriage through silence. Her
marriage took place in May in the year 1959. During her marriage due to
the heavy veil, she was unable to see the face of her husband, who leaves
immediately after the marriage without performing the bride’s roksadi
ceremony. The petitioner’s father who knew the truth behind the age of
the groom hid the fact from his family members and restricted her from
going to the respondent’s house. When the petitioner wasn’t allowed to
go to the respondent’s home, the respondent filed a case against the
petitioner’s father under the Indian Penal Code in the early part of 1960.
He withdraws the complaint in a few days when the petitioner’s father
sends her back to the respondent. The petitioner meets the respondent
for the first time on 15th April 1960. Only then does, she find that not
only is the respondent a very ordinary man from a middle-class family,
but also finds that the respondent is even older than her father. The real
age of the groom is found to be 60 years. After finding the truth the
petitioner denied having any food and wept all day for 2 continuous
days. When she insisted on going back to her father’s place, the
respondent beat her, but she somehow managed to escape. When she
finally leaves the place and reaches her father’s home, her father denies
taking her in and also scolds her for running away like this from her
marriage. After this, she has no other choice left so she goes to her
uncle’s place who agrees to let her stay at his house. The respondent
somehow manages to find her and takes her back with him to his house.
There he locks her in a room so that she could not escape again. The
respondent also files a complaint against her uncle under the Indian
Penal Code to hide the petitioner and not allow her to go back to the
respondent. The petitioner once again succeeds in escaping the
respondent and goes to her nanihal (father’s in-laws) from where finally
on March 1961 she files a petition for dissolution of marriage.

The case was first filed under the district court who rejected the plea on
the grounds, 1. that there was no misrepresentation of identity or fraud,
as the petitioner just overheard her parents speaking and nothing was
communicated to her directly. 2. Fraudulent misrepresentation must be
before the solemnization of marriage and not after it.

Laws involved:

The case was filed under different sections of the Hindu marriage act;

Section 5 – Conditions of a Hindu marriage

Section 12, 12(1), 12(1)(c) – Voidable marriages

Section 28 – Appeals from decrees and orders.

Section 17 – Fraud of the Indian Contract Act

Section 498 – Indian Penal Code (1860)

Cases referred:

Anath Nath De vs Sm. Lajjabati Devi, AIR 1950 Cal 778

Issues raised:

The issue raised here is,

1. Does the case of the petitioner fall under Section 12(1)(c)?

2. Was the petitioner entitled to the dissolution of marriage?
3. Was the consent of the mother also obtained by fraud and
misrepresentation?

Arguments advanced:

Petitioner: The counsels for the appellant’s side raised arguments on

the validity of the marriage and free consent. They stated that the
respondent had used the means of fraud to get married. He also beat the
petitioner and confined her to a room to stop her from escaping again
when she denied staying with the respondent. The petitioner also had no
cohabitation at all with the respondent providing all the valid grounds to
accept the petition for dissolution of marriage filed by the petitioner.
The petitioner pledged her oath in front of the court to support her
allegations, for which the respondent did not contradict at all.

Respondent: The respondent filed 2 cases under the Indian Penal code
against the petitioner’s father and her uncle because they both hid the
petitioner and did not allow her to go to the respondent’s house. After
the petitioner filed a complaint, the respondent just filed a written
complaint denying all the allegations made but he did not contest during
the hearing. The counsels argued that the written statement must hold
validity in the court and that the petition filed by the petitioner must be
rejected by the learned judge as there was no valid proof of fraud on the
part of the respondent. The misrepresentation of age was done by the
petitioner’s father and not by the respondent so the marriage must not
be dissolved as the respondent was not at fault here.

Judgment:

When the case was being held in the district court the respondent just
filed a written statement denying all the allegations made but he never
came to the court. The petitioner pledged under oath to support all her
allegations which the respondent didn’t contradict. The honorable judge
of the district court rejected the plea after which the case was filed under
the high court of Patna. The learned judge of the high court stated that
the plea by the petitioner was valid and that, the learned judge of the
district court was wrong in rejecting the motion. According to him the
consent of the petitioner was obtained by fraud, as she was never directly
communicated about the age of the groom. And according to section 17
of the Indian Contract Act “fraud” is an act by a party, communicated
either directly or through an agent to deceive the other party or to
convince him/her to enter into a contract. And in this case, the petitioner
was deceived by the information she overheard between her parents.
This is also more valid in a situation like this because, according to
Hindus, a father doesn’t usually speak about such matters with their kids
directly. It is mostly through a mediator or the mother who conveys the
information. The learned judge also feels that the petitioner’s father was
aware of the fact that the groom is not between the age of 25-30 years,
due to which he decided to use her mother as a mediator to provide the
petitioner a piece of wrongful information about the groom. In case the
true age of the respondent was known to the petitioner and even then,
she didn’t deny the marriage, then in that case the law would be
different. But in this case, as the petitioner didn’t know the age of the
respondent till after the marriage, she is entitled to relief (in this case
dissolution of the marriage). And therefore, the judge feels that the
consent of the petitioner was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation.

Case referred: The judge of the district court relied on the judgement of
the case, Anath Nath De vs Lajjabati Devi on 22 nd May 1950. Under this
case, honorable judge S. Datta dismissed the case with costs. This case
was also filed for fraud and misrepresentation. Under this case, the
husband who is the petitioner filed a case, against the family members
of the respondent (wife). The petitioner claimed that the respondents
had obtained his consent for marriage by misrepresentation as they did
not tell the petitioner that the respondent was suffering from
tuberculosis before the marriage. The judge decided that hiding a
disease is not a valid reason to avoid marriage, and also according to
the doctor’s report, the disease was almost cured. So, the judge found no
valid reason to declare the marriage null and void, which is why he
dismissed the case.

In the end, the honorable judge of the Patna High Court passed a
judgement in favor of the petitioner, dissolving the marriage between her
and the respondent on the grounds of fraud and misrepresentation.

My opinion:
“Fraud” is an act committed by a person either directly or through
his/her agent to deceive the other party or to induce them to enter into a
contract. According to clause 2 of section 17 of the Indian Contract Act
1872, the active concealment of a fact by a party to the other is
considered fraud. And even in this case the petitioner’s father knowingly
concealed the fact about the groom’s age from her daughter and also
used her mother as an agent to convey false information about the age to
her daughter. This act of the petitioner’s father constitutes fraud and the
learned judge was right in agreeing to this clause and providing a
judgment based on it.

A petition for dissolution of marriage was filed under section 12 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, and clause (c) of subsection 1 of section 12 states
that when the consent of a party is obtained by force or fraud then that
marriage falls under the category of voidable marriage by the court. And
as in this case, the consent was obtained by fraud it provides valid
grounds to regard this marriage as null and void.