1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR FIRST APPEAL NO. 4 OF 2008 Smt. Maya wd/o A. Khandekar vs. Smt. Shakuntalabai P. Khandekar & Ors. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. MARCH 12, 2008. Heard Shri Prasad, Advocate for the appellant and Shri Choube, Advocate for respondents No. 1, 3 & 4. M.J.C. No. 160 of 2004 was filed by present Respondents No. 1 to 4 for obtaining a legal heir certificate after the death of one Arvind Khandekar s/o Respondents No. 1 & 2 and brother of Respondents No. 3 & 4. The present appellant objected to it and contended that she is legally wedded wife of Arvind. She relied upon a certificate styled as memorandum of marriage issued on 20.12.2006 by Marriage Registrar, Nagpur. The Court below rejected her objection after noticing that she was already married with Madhukar Meshram. Therefore, her alleged marriage with Arvind was not valid. She also could not prove any divorce from Madhukar 2 Meshram. Before this Court, it was contended that she had obtained a divorce as per custom prevalent in the community. I, therefore, adjourned the matter on various occasions to enable the appellant to place any such document or evidence on record. The appellant has filed Civil Application No.1730 of 2008 seeking permission to place on record certificate dated 25.2.2008 issued by Vidarbha Bhikku Sangh, affidavit dated 25.2.2008 issued by one Priest viz., Bhante Dhamma Jyoti of Vidarbha Bhikku Sangh and deposition of one Madhukar Meshram dated 8.2.2006 before family Court. The certificate dated 25.2.2008 issued by Vidarbha Bhikku Sangh is with heading “Opinion”. It is mentioned that there was divorce “sod chitthi” between present appellant and Madhukar Meshram on 25.1.1992 in presence of witnesses. It is further mentioned that at that time, it was acceptable in society and it is acceptable to signatory, who is president of Vidarbha Bhikku Sangh. The second document is affidavit of Priest in which he has stated that in presence of five witnesses, there was divorce by mutual consent. He has, thereafter, stated that as per custom and usage in community, as most of the persons are poor and 3 do not have funds to go to Courts of law, such divorce is taking place. It is stated that such divorce takes place only if both parties agree and if they do not agree, they are advised to approach the Court of law. The last document is xerox copy of deposition of Madhukar Ramchandra Meshram recorded in proceedings before the family Court in which he has stated that on 25.1.1992, he was divorced from his wife i.e. this appellant. None of these documents speak of any custom prevalent in the community and no instances are mentioned. The documents are, therefore, totally irrelevant for finding out any custom. Though several chances are given to present appellant, the appellant could not substantiate her contention that such a custom is prevalent in the society. The memorandum of marriage shows status of present appellant as divorced though it shows date of marriage as 4.2.1993 and the dates on which bride and her guardian placed their signatures are shown as 19.5.1995. The Registrar has stated that he received the memorandum with fee of Rs.50/- on 19.5.1995 and accordingly he has 4 registered the marriage. However, it is apparent that the Registrar has not gone into the correctness of status of present appellant at that time. Before lower Court the status has been proved. The appellant could not bring on record anything to show that there was legal and valid divorce between Madhukar Meshram and herself. In the circumstances, First Appeal is summarily dismissed. No costs. JUDGE *GS.