GOLDA Vs. M. HARIKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/estranged Wife of the Respondent filed Petition before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore under Sec. 27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 seeking dissolution of the marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent, which took place on 19/6/2013 on the ground of cruelty. The Divorce Petition was returned with the following Endorsement:

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that it has been mentioned clearly in the Petition that both the Petitioner and Respondent belong to Christian Community and there is no legal embargo to entertain the Petition under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. As per Sec. 15 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, may be registered under this Chapter by Marriage Officer in the territories. Thus, the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore failed to note certain conditions prescribed in Sec. 15 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. He further submitted that the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 and the Marriage Certificate issued vide Marriage Sl. No.52/2013 registering the marriage solemnized between the Petitioner and the Respondent on 19/6/2013. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judge failed to note that the Registration of Marriage under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 will be in addition to and not in derogation of any other law for the time being force. Added to it, the learned Judge failed to note that nowhere under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, it has been stated in order to maintain a Divorce Petition under the Special Marriage Act, the marriage ought to be registered under the Special Marriage Act. In this case, the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009. On a demurrer submitted that in the event of Divorce Petition filed under Divorce Act, 1869 or Special Marriage Act, 1954, it is the Principal District Judge, who has got jurisdiction to entertain the Petition. In this case, admittedly, both the Petitioner and Respondent belong to Christians and they have no other choice except to approach the Principal District Judge. As per Sec. 13 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 even after marriage, the same can be registered. In this case, after the marriage, dispute arouse between Petitioner and Respondent, hence, there is no possibility to register the marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.

(3.) He further submitted that the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Vellore failed to consider wrong quoting of provision of law is not fatal to the case. Added to it, the learned Judge failed to notify what is the remedy available to the Petitioner for getting Divorce before rejecting Petition filed under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Hence, the Petitioner filed the present Revision.