RAJINDER SHARMA Vs ARPANA SHARMA
Bench: G.S. SINGHVI,ASOK KUMAR GANGULY, , ,
Case number: C.A. No.-005051-005052 / 2011
Diary number: 24219 / 2009
Advocates: YASH PAL DHINGRA Vs
BALBIR SINGH GUPTA
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.5051-5052_ OF 2011 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.21438-21439 OF 2009)
Rajinder Sharma ..Appellant(s)
- Versus -
Arpana Sharma ..Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
GANGULY, J.
1.Leave granted.
2.These appeals are directed against the judgment
and order dated 30.5.2009 passed by the High
Court of Punjab and Haryana.
1
3.By the impugned judgment, the learned Single
Judge of the High Court remitted the appeal to
the trial Court with a direction to the trial
Court to allow the respondent herein to adduce
additional evidence and by giving corresponding
right to the appellant herein to rebut that
evidence.
4.The facts of the case are rather peculiar.
5.A petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage
Act for annulment of the marriage was filed by
the appellant stating therein that he developed
friendly relationship with respondent as they had
their business premises adjacent to each other.
The case which has been made by the appellant is
that respondent requested him to perform a mock
marriage with her in order to enable her to avoid
the predicament of marrying a boy who has been
selected by her parents and who is not of her
liking. The case of the appellant is that such a
2
mock marriage took place in the presence of some
relatives and some photographs were also taken.
Thereafter, the marriage of appellant with
another girl was fixed but that could not be
solemnized as relations from the side of that
girl possibly came to know about the existence of
the mock marriage.
6.It may be noted that respondent filed an FIR for
commission of an offence under Section 420 IPC
against the appellant.
7.Thereafter, the appellant filed a petition under
Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for
declaring the marriage as null and void.
8.The trial Court allowed the appellant’s petition
for annulment of marriage. Challenging the same,
respondent filed an appeal before the High Court
and along with that she filed an application for
3
adducing additional evidence under Order 41 Rule
27 of CPC.
9.The High Court instead of deciding the
controversy, remitted the matter to the trial
Court and directed the trial Court to allow the
application of the respondent for adducing
additional evidence by giving corresponding right
to the appellant to rebut that evidence and also
directed the trial Court to decide the matter
afresh.
10.It appears that most of the documents which are
sought to be adduced by way of adducing evidence
are on record. In that view of the matter, the
order to remit the matter to the trial Court is
not warranted. The High Court, being the first
appellate Court, is a Court of both fact and law.
Therefore, it will be in the interest of justice
for the High Court to decide the controversy in
accordance with law.
4
11.In the facts of the case the order of remand
will merely prolong the proceedings between the
parties.
12.For the aforesaid reasons, we cannot sustain the
order of the High Court, which is set aside. We
request the High Court to decide the appeals in
accordance with law and as early as possible and
definitely by the end of year 2011.
13.With these directions, the appeals are disposed
of. There will no order as to costs.
.......................J. (G.S. SINGHVI)
.......................J. (ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)
New Delhi July 04, 2011
5
6