Kerala High Court
Beffy Jeeson vs State Of Kerala on 3 June, 2021
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
