IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 11576 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 BEFFY JEESON,
AGED 26 YEARS,
D/O. JEESON C.J.,
CHIRAYATH HOUSE, MUKKATUKARA,
NETTISSERY P.O., THRISSUR-680657.
2 DENNIS JOSEPH THOMAS,
AGED 26 YEARS,
S/O THOMAS, MACOMB,
MICHIGAN STATE, MI 48042-2348,
USA @ MANGATT HOUSE,
POONJAR THEKKEKARA,
POONJAR P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686582.
BY ADVS.
FRANKLIN ARACKAL
P.D.JAYAN MON
M.B.SOORI
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE/RDO,
FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION,
CIVIL LINES ROAD,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003.
3 SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE,
KUTTANELLUR,
THRISSUR-680014.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. PRINCY XAVIER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.11576/2021
:2 :
JUDGMENT
~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2021 The 1st petitioner is a holder of BDS and belongs to Roman Catholic community, having residence in Madakkathara Grama Panchayat in Thrissur District. The 2 nd petitioner is a US Citizen of Indian origin, belonging to Poonjar in Kottayam District.
2. Petitioners 1 and 2 proposed to marry each other with the blessings of their family and an engagement was held at Poonjar on 17.05.2019. The marriage was scheduled to be held on 15.05.2020. Unfortunately, due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the consequential lockdown, the marriage did not take place as planned.
3. The petitioners thereupon postponed the proposed marriage to 15.05.2021. The 2nd petitioner, with a view to get WP(C) No.11576/2021 :3 : married, came to India again in the month of May, 2021. He has to go back to U.S. by 05.06.2021, as his VISA is expiring. As the petitioners could not have invoked the Special Marriage Act for registering the marriage due to the requirement of 30 days notice period, the petitioners decided to solemnise their marriage under the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act, 1920.
4. On 25.05.2021, the 1st petitioner gave Ext.P4 notice of marriage to the 2nd respondent. The notice was given under Section 7 of the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act. The notice was given to the 2nd respondent as the 3rd respondent- Sub Registrar was not functioning on that date.
5. The petitioners submitted Exts.P5 and P6 affidavits also before the 2nd respondent. Apart from the said affidavits, two affidavits of the witnesses, Exts.P7 and P8, were also filed before the 2nd respondent. However, it is the contention of the petitioners that the 2nd respondent did not act on the application. It is also submitted that now the 3rd respondent is in office and can discharge the functions under the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act, 1920.
WP(C) No.11576/2021 :4 :
6. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioners have not made out a case of urgency in the writ petition so as to seek immediate relief. No customary marriage has taken place in respect of the petitioners. Though this Court has delivered certain judgments in favour of certain other petitioners, in all those cases, customary marriages were already held. In this case, no customary marriage has taken place between the petitioners and therefore no relief can be given to the petitioners.
7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
8. The fact remains that the petitioners proposed to get married and underwent an engagement ceremony on 17.05.2019. The marriage could not take place on 15.05.2020 due to Covid-19 pandemic. The 2 nd petitioner had to leave to U.S. immediately thereafter. The petitioners therefore postponed their marriage to 15.05.2021. The 1 st petitioner has given Ext.P4 notice to the 2nd respondent on 25.05.2021 seeking to solemnise their marriage, invoking Section 7 of the WP(C) No.11576/2021 :5 : Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act.
9. The office of the 3rd respondent was not functioning as on the date of issue of notice on 25.05.2021. It is therefore that the 1st petitioner had given notice to the 2nd respondent. It is true that the notice has to be published before the solemnisation of marriage under the Act. Had the 2nd respondent published the notice on 25.05.2021 itself, the marriage could have been solemnised as required under Section 19 of the Act.
10. The unfortunate situation has cropped up due to Covid-19 pandemic which is still subsisting. In the Indian societal context, postponing a marriage already fixed for whatever reason, is considered as ominous. The petitioners were forced to postpone the date of marriage once due to nationwide lockdown. The marriage cannot be again postponed due to pandemic. Human life and relations have to move on and the mankind has to prevail upon viruses. In the peculiar circumstances of this case, it will be very harsh if the petitioners are not permitted to get their marriage solemnised WP(C) No.11576/2021 :6 : as planned and before the 2 nd petitioner goes to U.S. On 05.06.2021. In the peculiar facts of this case, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents should be directed to solemnise the marriage of the petitioners forthwith on equitable grounds.
11. In the circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to transfer all the records accompanying Ext.P4 notice issued by the petitioners, to the office of the 3rd respondent forthwith, at any rate, before 10.30 a.m. on 04.06.2021. The 3rd respondent is directed to obtain oath of the 1 st petitioner and issue a Certificate under Section 10 forthwith. After issuing a certificate, the marriage between the petitioners should be solemnised under Section 19, on 04.06.2021 itself. In the facts of the case, the 3rd respondent may dispense with the requirements of issuing notice on Marriage Registrars of other local areas. The marriage between the petitioners shall be solemnised and registered under Section 22 if both of them present themselves before the 3rd respondent on 04.06.2021. It is made clear that the requirements as to notices under the WP(C) No.11576/2021 :7 : Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act are waived in this case on equitable grounds and in view of the peculiar circumstances arising in this case due to Covid-19 pandemic.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE aks/03.06.2021 WP(C) No.11576/2021 :8 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11576/2021 PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE FLIGH TICKET BOOKED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER WITH QATAR AIRWAYS.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
25/05/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER BY E-MAIL.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 1ST
PETITIONER DATED 25/05/2021.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT OF THE 2ND
PETITIONER DATED 25/05/2021.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
25/05/2021 OF THE 1ST WITNESS FILED
ALONG WITH EXHIBIT P4.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED
25/05/2021 OF THE 2ND WITNESS FILED
ALONG WITH EXHIBIT P4.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO.3558/2017 DATED 21/02/2017.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO.705/2019 DATED 11/01/2019.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
NO.9154/2012.
SR