ANTONY JOSEPH Vs. SUB REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners impugn Ext.P5, whereby, the request made by their son - Sri.Joby Antony, to marry under the Special Marriage Act, has been rejected on the ground that there are no sufficient materials to show that he and his proposed bride are single, or without a living spouse, so as to satisfy the rigour of Sec. 8 of the Special Marriage Act ('Act', for short).

(2.) Sri.Sajeev Kumar K.Gopal - learned counsel for the petitioners, vehemently argued that the petitioners have placed on record Exts.P1 and P4 documents, to establish that both the groom and bride had been earlier married, but obtained divorce from their respective spouses; and are, therefore, presently single and without living spouses. He explained that, however, this has not been accepted by the respondent - Sub Registrar, but that he issued the impugned Ext.P5 order merely saying that, unless both the groom and the bride are able to show that their respective divorces were obtained on mutual consent, it cannot be acted upon. He contended that this reason in Ext.P5 is not merely illegal, but wholly untenable.

(3.) Smt.Vidya Kuriakose - learned Government Pleader, in response, submitted that Ext.P5 appears to have been issued by the respondent only because he was not favoured with enough information to be convinced that the groom and bride are both now without living spouses. She submitted that, going by Exts.P1 and P4, it is not clear as to the nature of divorces obtained by them; and that it is, therefore, perhaps that the respondent has issued Ext.P5. She, however, left it to this Court to issue appropriate orders and submitted that respondent will abide by the same.