MARIASOOSAI Vs. CLARA MARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case raises an interesting question of law. The original petition is one filed under S. 4 of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 by the husband for a decree declaring that the alleged marriage between him and the respondent is null and void and consequently, the respondent is not his legally wedded wife. In the petition, it is stated that he was having intimacy with the respondent for a few months and in order to compel him to marry her, the respondent's parents and relatives, with the help of the police, by force got executed a deed of marriage on paper bearing Rs. 2.50 stamp or the 27th October, 1988 and got it registered in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Andimadam According to the provisions of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, a Christian marriage can be solemnized only in any of the modes prescribed in S. 5 of the said Act. No formality or ceremony was gone through and only an agreement was executed as stated earlier and that too, under compulsion. The registration of the document would not amount to registration of the marriage and therefore, the marriage is null and void.

(2.) The respondent remained ex parte and the petitioner gave evidence in support of the allegations made in the petition. He has marked the agreement as Exhibit A-1. A perusal of Exhibit A- 1 shows that there was no marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Christian Marriage Act. The agreement by itself cannot bring about a valid marriage.

(3.) The District Judge has accepted the evidence adduced by the petitioner and held that the petitioner was entitled to the relief prayed for by him. But instead of passing a decree for declaring the marriage to be void, the District Judge ordered that the marriage said to have been performed between the petitioner and the respondent was dissolved. It was also added by the District Judge that the decree is subject to confirmation by this Court under S. 20 of the Indian Divorce Act.