• I'm petitioner - husband granted decree of nullity HMA section 11

"My marriage date July  2005 at that time i'm panchyati divorce & divorce first prossding completed. my perantes  want to remarry of me so that my brother up load my profile on matrimonial site then we tell about my first marriage and  all the paper show & provide to him and after some time they info the who can objection accept me i have no objection for marriage as soon as possible so that he made every perpetration regarding marriage at surat and got marred July 2003

 in a hotel  mother & of his all family member attend the marriage and bill paid by us. this his second marriage too. after some in December 2003 i obtained divorce decree from court and which i & my mother given to him (husband) since the  first day of my marrige his behavior was not good (this is my second marriage i have not other way accepted him as he is before marriage he is loving man his but after marriage suddenly i found he cruel person  )and pregnant he said that first baby delivery should be in your mother it is the custom. then my mother come and taken me to my parental home. he came to see after sixteen days of delivery of  baby boy during he stay one day i he press the talu of baby (forehead) baby cry and cry. when the doctor says that it is too dangerous never do this again ever. i too much afraid and decide not go home and all bad experience tell to my mother they tell my husband that you should came with your mother or other relatives we want talk them about them. My parent want to him or his relatives only sureties not to past thing again. but he never came with anyone only telephonic by his mother said that i'm too old what i do both are educated. this not good for us. i'm only and elder sister of my two brother. 
"In 2008 he came to my parent house (where i live with since September 2005) one night during his stay i check his mobile i found that some video cilp and phots with another lady this time i really want to go with him but my destiny not allow me. i not go with him and not to talk with anyone at that night or some days after some day a told that to my mom. mu husband send me a section 9 notice from surat. after that he file 13 instead section 9 case. in surat section 13 case we filed in Suprem Court a transferred petition that is allow. transferred surat to delhi court. i also filed 125 for maintenance case in faridabad where i lived with my family. No summon section 13 a came from any delhi court we inquired the case we found that case closed due to non prosecution in court. He was not came in 125 case in family court. I received a summon from surat court Section 11 we read that document and surprised that he make a false story during the mediation dated  03/09/10 and 06/09/10 in the supreme court  came to that you show me and told me that at the time marriage with you i (me) not legally divorcee. Actually The last mediation date in supreme court was 11/08/2010, and supreme court also transferred this case surat to faridabad court.on 30/08/10. 
My advocate advise me to  inquired about his first divorce paper becouse he never write in any case about the clearly so we great chase we found the paper of his first divorce decmber 2012. My husband is also not divorcee at the time of our marriage 04/07/2003 he divoceed on 07/07/03,  he concealed this fact to all the court Surat,on the oath that in the mediation center Supreme Court,Faridabad Family Court, in all courts prossidings. we even exhibited the meditation report of supreme court dated 11/08/10 in family court in faridabad that to mentioned that about all thing but not his false story.  my husband not come with clean hands in the court. but court give him  a decree of nullity of his marriage. now i file a case in Punjab Haryana high court.

court order February 2015 
At the request of learned counsel for the respondent to cite
the case law that the delay could not debar the petitioner to file the
petition under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for
annulment of the marriage, by a decree of nullity, adjourned.

His advocate file 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Sections 11 and 23 - Scope of Section 23 - Petition under Section 11 of Act for obtaining a declaration of nullity of marriage which was void ab initio would not fall within scope of words in any proceedings under this Act used in Section 23 - On 18-7-1970 when appellant and respondent performed marriage, the latter's previous marriage with respondent No.2 was admittedly subsisting - Their marriage will be covered by Section 11 read with Section 5(i) of Act and thus shall be void ab initio. 

Asked 3 years ago in Family Law from Faridabad, Haryana
Religion: Hindu
1) your marriage during subsistence of earlier marriage is null and void . 

2) Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M.Malhotra Vs. Union of India and others AIR 2006 SC 80 to contend that the marriage of the respondent being void did not need any declaration from the court. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case referred to above was pleased to law down as under:-

"11. For appreciating the status of a Hindu woman marrying a Hindu male with a living spouse some of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (thereafter referred to as the Marriage Act) have to be examined. Section 11 of the Marriage Act declared such a marriage as null and void in the following terms::
11. "Void marriage-- Any marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by either party thereto against the other party, be so declared by a decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v) of Section 5."

3) clause (i) of Section 5 lays down, for a lawful marriage, he necessary condition that neither party should have a spouse living at the time of the marriage. A marriage in contravention of this condition, therefore, is null and void. By reason of the overriding effect of the Marriage Act as mentioned in section 4, no aid can be taken of the earlier Hindu law or any custom or usage as a part of that law inconsistent with any provision of the Act. So far as Section 12 is concerned, it is confined to other categories of marriages and is not applicable to one solemnized in violation of Section 5 (i) of the Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 12 puts further restrictions on such a right. The cases covered by this section are not void ab initio, and unless all the conditions mentioned therein are fulfilled and the aggrieved party exercises the right to avoid it, the same continues to be effective The marriages covered by Section 11 are void ipso jure, that is, void from the very inception, and have to be ignored as not existing in law at all if and when such a question arises. Although the section permits a formal declaration to be made on the presentation of a petition, it is not essential to obtain in advance such a formal declaration from a court in a proceeding specifically commenced for the purpose.
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
45638 Answers
2681 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

in the case of Vinod Sehgal Vs. Smt.Santosh Kumari and another 1979 All India Hindu Law Reporter 545, wherein this court was pleased to lay down as under:-

"12. The Division Bench in a reference made in this case has held that a petition under section 11 of the Act for obtaining a declaration of nullity of a marriage, which was void ab initio would not fall within the scope of the words 'in any proceedings under this Act' used in section 23.On July 18, 1970, when the appellant and Santosh Kumari married, the latter's previous marriage with Vinod Kumar respondent No.2 was admittedly subsisting. Their marriage will be covered by section 11 read with section 5 (i) of the Act and thus shall be void ab inito. In view of the decision of the Division Bench, section 23 of the Act shall have no application. The marriage of the appellant with Santosh Kumari respondent, therefore, shall continue to be void ab initio irrespective of the fact that he knew about the previous subsisting marriage of Santosh Kumari. In this situation the appellant is entitled to a decree of nullity of his marriage with Santosh Kumari under section 11 of the At and the learned District Judge erred in holding otherwise."
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
45638 Answers
2681 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1) if petitioner has not come to court with clean hands and has suppreesed material facts he is not entitled to any relief 

2) A
litigant is bound to make “full and true disclosure of facts”. (Refer :
Tilokchand H.B. Motichand & Ors. v. Munshi & Anr. [1969 (1) SCC
110]; A. Shanmugam v. Ariya Kshatriya Rajakula Vamsathu
Madalaya Nandhavana Paripalanai Sangam & Anr. [(2012) 6 SCC
430]; Chandra Shashi v. Anil Kumar Verma [(1995) SCC 1 421];
Abhyudya Sanstha v. Union of India & Ors. [(2011) 6 SCC 145];
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narmada Bachao Andolan & Anr.
[(2011) 7 SCC 639]; Kalyaneshwari v. Union of India & Anr.
[(2011) 3 SCC 287)].

3) The person seeking equity must do equity. It is not just the
clean hands, but also clean mind, clean heart and clean objective
that are the equi-fundamentals of judicious litigation. The legal
maxim jure naturae aequum est neminem cum alterius detrimento et
injuria fieri locupletiorem, which means that it is a law of nature
that one should not be enriched by the loss or injury to another, is
the percept for Courts. Wide jurisdiction of the court should not
become a source of abuse of the process of law by the disgruntled
litigant. Careful exercise is also necessary to ensure that the
litigation is genuine, not motivated by extraneous considerations
and imposes an obligation upon the litigant to disclose the true
facts and approach the court with clean hands.
35. No litigant can play ‘hide and seek’ with the courts or adopt
‘pick and choose’. True facts ought to be disclosed as the Court
knows law, but not facts. One, who does not come with candid
facts and clean breast cannot hold a writ of the court with soiled
hands. Suppression or concealment of material facts is
impermissible to a litigant or even as a technique of advocacy. In
such cases, the Court is duty bound to discharge rule nisi and
such applicant is required to be dealt with for contempt of court
for abusing the process of the court. {K.D. Sharma v. Steel
Authority of India Ltd. & Ors. [(2008) 12 SCC 481].
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
45638 Answers
2681 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Since both of you were not divorced at the time of marriage, your marriage is null and void ab initio. Also, since you have proof that he has not come to court with clean hands, make such submission before the court along with evidence. Such wrong statement on oath knowing that the statement made is wrong is an offence of perjury under the criminal law and the court does not grant any relief to such person. Instead the court can suo moto take action against such person.
Shaveta Sanghi
Advocate, Panchkula
866 Answers
64 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1. Not only you, he was also not divorced when both of you got married,

2. For the above reason, your marriage is void at law,

3. Moreover, he had supressed the fact and did not come before the Court with clean hand,

4. Pray for relif from the Court based on the above.
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
18518 Answers
449 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

The citation provided above by Adv Sethi is adequate to seek relief from the Court.
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
18518 Answers
449 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

1. Panchayati divorce has no legal value.

2. Your marriage without obtaining divorcing from the court is null and void. 

3. Your husband has concealed facts from the court and has made himself liable to be prosecuted for perjury. 

4. The court can on its own motion initiate perjury proceedings against him.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
22977 Answers
634 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Furthermore, he can also be prosecuted for bigamy and cheating as he was not divorced at the time of marriage.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
22977 Answers
634 Consultations

5.0 on 5.0

Dear Querist
As per information provided by you, both of you are legally married with others at the time of your marriage solemnization, hence the marriage is ab-initio void and the court concerned passed correct order.

if you think that he hide something or give false statement before courts then you may file a perjury case against him before court where he filed false statement on oath.

there are many judgments in which the Apex court clearly held that "As a general Rule, suppression of a material fact by a litigant disqualifies such litigant from obtaining any relief"
(2004)7 SCC 166 para 13
2005 SCC(Cri.)1322 para 21
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
4856 Answers
221 Consultations

4.9 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
  Ask a lawyer