NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5054_____OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.17485 OF 2008)

Pallavi Bhardwah  ..Appellant(s)

- Versus -

Pratap Chauhan ..Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

GANGULY, J.

1.Leave granted.

2.Heard  learned  counsel  for  the  parties  and  

carefully perused the record.

1

3.This appeal is from a judgment and order dated  

25.4.2008  passed by  the Division  Bench of  the  

High  Court  in  First  Appeal  No.328/2008.  The  

Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned  

judgment  disposed  of  the  First  Appeal  with  

certain  directions  relating  to  so-called  

matrimonial dispute between the parties.  

4. The case is based on very peculiar facts. The  

grievances of the appellant are that there is no  

marriage between him and the respondent but the  

respondent  in  order  to  defame  her  in  society  

filed a suit for restitution for conjugal rights,  

inter alia, on the ground that marriage between  

them took place on 28th October, 2007. It is an  

admitted position that there is no valid document  

evidencing marriage. Nor is there any acceptable  

evidence of marriage. The Principal Judge, Family  

Court,  Meerut in  his judgment  and order  dated  

01.04.2008 has elaborately discussed the facts.  

2

Since  the  facts  have  been  very  elaborately  

discussed in the judgment of the Family Court,  

the same need not be repeated here. The Family  

Court came to a finding that the attempt of the  

husband is to blackmail the appellant herein and  

the respondent husband had already married Smt.  

Seema, D/o Shri Jeet Singh, R/o 263 Begum Bagh,  

Meerut and a daughter was born in connection with  

the said marriage and was studying in school. In  

the  background  of  those  facts  the  Principal  

Judge, Family Court, Meerut held since there is  

no marriage there is no question of restitution.  

The Family Court, therefore, dismissed the said  

petition with cost of Rs.2 lacs.

5.From  the  said  judgment,  an  appeal  was  filed  

before the High Court in which the Division Bench  

of the High Court has taken very peculiar stand  

in  proceeding  by  trying  for  conciliation.  The  

High Court has noted that the appellant girl has  

3

categorically  denied  the  existence  of  marriage  

and the existence of joint account in a bank. The  

High Court has not recorded anywhere about the  

validity  of  the  marriage.  Even  then  the  High  

Court strangely enough explored the possibility  

of  a settlement  between the  parties. The  High  

Court  without coming  to any  finding about  the  

validity of marriage and after recording that the  

validity  of marriage  was always  denied by  the  

appellant  gave  certain  directions  which  are  

wholly inconsistent with the facts of the case.  

Since  no  marriage  has  been  established,  

directions  given by  the High  Court are  wholly  

inappropriate.  

6.Therefore, the order of the High Court is set  

aside and we restore the judgment of the Family  

Court with cost of Rs.2 lacs to be paid by the  

respondent within 3 months in favour of Supreme  

Court Mediation Centre, New Delhi.

4

7.The appeal is thus allowed with costs of Rs.2  

lacs as aforesaid.

   .......................J. (G.S. SINGHVI)

.......................J. (ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)

New Delhi July 04, 2011  

5