Sujith Chandy vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 4883 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

    WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942

                        WP(C).No.3459 OF 2021(F)


PETITIONER/S:

                SUJITH CHANDY
                AGED 44 YEARS
                S/O. JOSEPH CHANDY, MALLOOSSERIL HOUSE, KOTHALA, P.O.
                686 502.

                BY ADV. SMT.BINDU GOPINATH

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         STATE OF KERALA
                REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY IN CHARGE OF
                REGISTRATION OF BIRTH AND DEATH STATE SECRETARIAT
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

      2         KOOROPPADA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
                REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KOOROPPADA GRAMA
                PANCHAYATH, KOOROPPADA P.O, KOTTAYAM 686 502.

      3         THE SECRETARY,
                KOOROPPADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH-686 502


OTHER PRESENT:

                SC C.N SREEKUMAR

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.3459 OF 2021(F)



                                      2




                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P2 order

passed by the 3rd respondent refusing to permit registration of the marriage

of the petitioner with Shabi Rajan, through video conferencing facility. The

facts in the writ petition would indicate that the marriage of the petitioner

with Shabi Rajan was solemnised on 12.03.2005 as per the provisions of the

Kerala Registration of Marriage (Common) Rules, 2008 and, the petitioner

and his wife had preferred application for registration of marriage before the

3rd respondent. There was a delay occasioned by the 3 rd respondent in

considering the application for registration. The wife of the petitioner is

presently residing in Abu Dhabi with her three minor children and they got an

opportunity to migrate to United Kingdom. In the writ petition it is the case

of the petitioner that when the request was made before the 3 rd respondent

for permitting registration of the marriage through video conferencing with

his wife, the said request was turned down by the 3 rd respondent by Ext.P2

order.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the

learned Government Pleader for the 1 st respondent. In the nature of the

order that is proposed to be passed, I deem it not necessary to hear the 2 nd

and the 3rd respondents.

WP(C).No.3459 OF 2021(F)

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that this

Court,in almost identical circumstances, permitted the registration of the

marriage by securing the presence of the wife of the petitioner therein

through video conferencing. Taking note of the above contention, this Writ

Petition is disposed with the following directions:

i) An authorised representative of the wife of the petitioner, preferably one among her parents, shall file an affidavit before the 3 rd respondent stating that he/she has been duly authorised by the wife of the petitioner to sign in the memorandum and also in the marriage register on behalf of the wife of the petitioner.

ii) If an affidavit as directed is filed before the 3 rd respondent, he shall complete the formalities for registration of the marriage after securing the presence of the wife of the petitioner through video conferencing, and issue marriage certificate to the petitioner, after obtaining signatures of the petitioner and the authorised representative of his wife.

iii) The wife of the petitioner shall appear before the 3 rd respondent and sign in the marriage register within one year from the date of registration. In case the wife of the petitioner does not comply with the said direction, the 3rd respondent will be at liberty to revoke the registration of their marriage.

iv)The petitioner shall produce certified copy of the judgment before the 3rd respondent for necessary information and further action. He shall also make necessary arrangements for the video conferencing.

Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the Panchayath

that the Panchayath does not have a stable wi-fi connection for conducting WP(C).No.3459 OF 2021(F)

the video conferencing, the petitioner is directed to make the necessary

arrangements for the conduct of the proceedings through video

conferencing and the directions issued in this judgment shall operate only if

the said stable wi-fi connection is made available by the petitioner.

Sd/-

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

SJ WP(C).No.3459 OF 2021(F)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH KOTHALA DATED 15.3.2005.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 3.02.2021.