Indian Divorce Act | Karnataka High Court Declares Marriage As Void Saying Woman Misrepresented And Concealed Her Real Age From Husband

A division bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Vijaykumar Patil allowed the petition filed by the husband questioning the order of the family court rejecting his petition filed under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act. The family court had held that petitioner (husband) failed to prove the grounds to declare his marriage with the respondent as null and void.

It was averred that appellant and respondent are Indian Christians and their marriage was solemnised in 2014 at Bhadravathi. The marriage proposal of the respondent was apparently brought by her mother and brother representing that respondent's (wife’s) age is 36 years at the time of marriage and based on such a representation the appellant and his family members had consented for the marriage in good faith.

It is alleged that when the appellant questioned the respondent and her family members, it was finally revealed that she has been suffering from incurable disease for a long time. It was also revealed that the respondents age was 41 years at the time of marriage, however, they have represented that her age is 36 years, when they brought the proposal of marriage. The wife is 4 years older than the appellant husband and the consent of the appellant for the marriage was obtained by fraud, misrepresentation and also there is concealment of material facts. Therefore the marriage remained unconsummated.

Thus it was argued that the act of the respondent and her family members amounts to fraud and misrepresentation as they have obtained the consent for marriage by concealing the material facts of the age and health issues of the respondent, and the same can be the ground to declare the marriage of the appellant and respondent as null and void.

On going through the records the bench noted that the appellant in his petition at para 5 has clearly pleaded that respondent wife and her family members have concealed the material fact i.e., age of the respondent.

It said “The respondent wife (RW1) in her cross examination has clearly admitted that she was aged 41 years at the time of marriage proposal, however she has disclosed her age as 36 years. When there is clear admission of the respondent wife that she and her family members have informed the appellant that her age is 36 years at the time of marriage proposal; however it was 41 years, we do not find any reason to disbelieve the admission of RW.1.”

It added “In our view, the Family Court erred in appreciating the pleading and evidence on record, which has resulted in incorrect finding.”

Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act enable husband or wife to present a petition to the District Court or to the High Court, praying that his or her marriage may be declared null and void. Section 19 of the Act stipulates grounds for the same, which includes consent obtained by force or fraud.

Thus the Court  allowed the appeal holding “from the evidence on record the appellant has proved the ground for declaring the marriage between the parties solemnised on 01.05.2014 as null and void.”

Case Title: ABC Vs XYZ

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5183 OF 2016

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 105

Date of Order: 01-03-2023

Appearance: Advocate G.Lakshmeesh Rao for appellant.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment