Family Law Presentation

Submitted By-
Kriti Raj- 500095389
Kriti Jha- 500095702
Asha Qureshi V. Afaq Qureshi
AIR 2002 MP 263
Topics

• Introduction
• Facts Of The Case
• Legal Issue Involve
• Contentions Of Appellant
• Contentions Of Respondent
• Judgement
Basic Introduction Of The Case

• Case Name • Smt. Asha Qureshi v. Afaq Qureshi

• Citation • Smt. Asha Qureshi v. Afaq Qureshi, AIR 2002 MP 263
• Date of Judgement • 17/05/2002
• Equivalent Citations • 2002 (4) MPHT 108
• Case Type • Civil Appeal
• Appellant • Asha Qureshi
• Respondent • Afaq Qureshi
• Bench • Hon’ble Justice V.K. Agarwal
• Court • Madhya Pradesh High Court
• Statutes Referred • Special Marriage Act, 1954; Sections – 24, 25, 29
• Indian Contract Act, 1872; Section-17
Facts Of The Case
• Marriage between Asha Qureshi and Afaq Qureshi was solemnised on 23/01/90
at Jabalpur, in accordance with the Special Marriage Act. They lived together for
1 Year.
• Afaq Qureshi alleged that after the marriage he came to know that Asha Qureshi
was a widow and she supressed the fact of her marriage, and that he agreed to
marry her believing that she was a virgin.
• Asha Qureshi denied the allegations.
• Thus, Afaq Qureshi filed a petition under sections 24 and 25 of the Special
Marriage Act, seeking a decree of nullity and of declaration of their marriage as
null and void.
• The Trial Court gave the decree of nullity.
• Aggrieved by this Asha Qureshi made an appeal to the High Court.
Legal Issue Involved

• Whether the appellant suppressed her earlier marriage? Whether

such suppression is a material fact?
• Whether the suppression as above would amount to fraud?
Contentions Of Appellant

The Counsel of the appellant contended that-

1) Parties were known to each other for a long time prior to
the marriage.
2) The respondent was fully aware of the appellant’s first marriage
and also about the death of her first husband. Thus, there is no
suppression of any material fact so as to constitute exercise of
fraud by the appellant.
Contentions Of Respondant

The counsel of the respondent contented that-

1) Respondent was never intimated about the material fact
of appellant’s first marriage by the appellant.
2) Respondent would not have married the appellant, had he known
about the earlier marriage of the appellant. Thus, fraud was
exercised by appellant and the marriage should be null and void.
Judgement

• The appeal was dismissed, and the respondant was entitled to a

decree of nullity
• Since the suppression and active concealment of her previous
marriage and widowhood have resulted in substantial
misrepresentation, the appellant is entitled to a nullity ruling
under section 25(iii) of the special law.