Madras High Court
A.C.Aswini vs The Inspector General Of ... on 31 August, 2021
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 31.08.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
A.C.Aswini ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registrar,
Santhome High Road, Chennai.
2.The Deputy Registrar,
O/o. District Registrar,
Paikinar Village,
Cheiyar Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Sub Registrar (Marriage Registrar),
O/o. Sub Registrar,
No.7, Kottai South Street,
Arani.
4.Srinivasan ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India,
to issue a writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent herein to cancel
the marriage certificate dt. 31.10.2018 registered at S.R.O. Arani in
Serial No.168 of 2018 after prima facie enquiry in accordance with law.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.E.V.Thulasi
For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan for R1 to R3
Government Advocate
Mr.A.Swaminathan for R4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/13
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioner has filed a writ of Mandamus to direct the first
respondent to cancel the marriage certificate dated 31.10.2018 registered
before the S.R.O. Arani in Serial No.168 of 2018 after conducting an
enquiry in accordance with law.
2.The case of the petitioner is that she had completed Master
degree in Computer Science and her father passed away in the year 2007
due to cardiac attack and since then, she is looking after by her uncle
Mr.Ravi Shankar and aunt Mrs.Sathya Bama. According to the
petitioner, the fourth respondent herein and his family members
approached her uncle and aunt and proposed to marry her alleging that
the fourth respondent is working as an Engineer in Singapore.
3.According to the petitioner, betrothal was conducted between her
and the fourth respondent herein in a grand manner on 27.10.2018 and
marriage date was fixed on 10.02.2019 and subsequently, the fourth
respondent parents had insisted her uncle to register the marriage, before
the marriage to be solemnized as per Hindu rites and customs to enable
the fourth respondent to proceed for Visa processing. According to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
petitioner, her family members also accepted the same and registered the
marriage on 31.10.2018 registered at S.R.O. Arani in Serial No.168 of
2018. According to the petitioner, on 13.11.2018, the fourth respondent
has informed her uncle through his family members that he is not
interested in marrying her for the reasons best known to him.
4.According to the petitioner, in spite of several efforts taken by
her family members, the fourth respondent was very stubborn that he is
not interested in marrying her. According to the petitioner, she agreed to
enter into an unregistered agreement dated 13.02.2019 with the fourth
respondent mutually agreeing to cancel the said marriage certificate
dated 31.10.2018 by following the procedure as mandated in law.
5.That being the case, if any one files a divorce petition for
cancelling the wedding, the second party will also cooperate with the
same for getting a divorce.
6.According to the petitioner, she had sent a representation to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
respondents 1 to 3, to cancel the illegal marriage certificate dated
31.10.2018 in serial No.168 of 2018 registered at S.R.O. Arani for the
purpose of Visa processing to Singapore. But, till date, there is no
response from them. The petitioner submits that she is left with no other
efficacy, the petitioner before this Court to direct the first respondent
herein to cancel the marriage certificate dated 31.10.2018 registered at
S.R.O. Arani in Serial No.168 of 2018 after conducting an enquiry in
accordance with law. According to the petitioner, though she is a
spinster, because of the registered marriage certificate dated 31.10.2018
she is being considered as married women in the eyes of law and the in
the society as well.
7.In support of his contentions, the petitioner submits that this
Court has got the power to cancel the said wedding and relied upon the
following judgments:
(a) A judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High
Court dated 05.01.2016 in the case of S.Jeyanthi vs. The Inspector
General of Registration and others in W.P.No.34508 of 2015, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
relevant portions of the aforesaid decision is extracted hereunder:
the petitioner is entitled for the relief sought for as
the 4th respondent has not come before this Court. It is the
specific case of the petitioner that she did not go to the
Registrar Office and got the alleged marriage registered.
Even the 4th respondent is conspicuous by his absence. The
petitioner has averred that a marriage certificate was
issued by an Advocate Sivakumar. I have never met the
Advocate nor visited his office. These certificates relied
upon by the petitioner have been obtained by fraud and
collusion and I have never married the petitioner or
consented to the same.
This Court had quashed the registration made by the third respondent
vide Registration No.2957 of 2014 dated 30.06.2014 and consequently,
directed the authority to delete and remove the same from the Marriage
Records only on the ground that the petitioner was cheated and fraud
committed on her.
(b) A judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High
Court dated 18.07.2016 in the case of D.Chandraleka vs. The District
Registrar and others in W.P.No.19815 of 2016, the relevant portions of
the aforesaid decision is extracted hereunder:
Marriage registration certificates to show that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
marriage took place between two willing parties out of
their own violation and later on, the aggrieved party
approaches this Court by filing these kind of writ petitions,
stating that the marriage was solemnised and registered
against the wishes. Especially for the reason that the future
of the girls like the petitioner and since the the
girl/petitioner is aged about 19 years and hailing from a
village and believing the representation of the 3rd
respondent, she took the drink which was laced with some
tranquilizers and became unconscious and under threat
and coercion, the marriage came to be registered though
there was no actually a marriage took place with the
required ceremonies and the 3rd respondent has also filed
a counter affidavit, admitting the said fact.
This Court had cancelled the proceedings of the second respondent in
Sl.No.599/2016 dated 04.04.2016 and directed the second respondent to
delete, cancel and remove Sl.No.599/2016 from the Marriage Records
maintained in his office.
(c)A judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court
dated 20.03.2014 in the case of C.Sivagama Sundari vs. The Inspector
General of Registration and others in W.P.No.15459 of 2012, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
relevant portions of the aforesaid decision is extracted hereunder:
There is no certificate of the person viz., the priest
who conducted the marriage and also there is no proof that
the alleged marriage took place within the jurisdiction of
Marakkanam Sub-Registrar's office and the fifth respondent
therein has not signed, the entire transaction is an
unauthorized one. Further, Form II which is an application
for Memorandum for Registration of Marriage was not at
all submitted and so are the mandatory documents that are
to be enclosed to Form II and even in form I, the signature
of the then Registrar (5th respondent) is not available.
This Court had set aside the proceedings of the third respondent dated
24.02.2012 in proceedings No.45/12 and directed the third respondent to
place the entire papers/documents/records before the District Registrar
(Admin), Tinidivanam, within a week from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order and the District Registrar (Admin) Tindivanam is directed to
take up the complaint of the petitioner and conduct an enquiry as
contemplated in the circular No.67 dated 03.11.2011
(C.No.52338/C1/2011) issued by the Inspector General of Registration
within two months thereafter.
8.The fourth respondent submits that he is a native of Arani and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
residing with his parents and for his livelihood and earning, he went to
Singapore and was working there. According to the fourth respondent,
during the period his parents saw an alliance in India and through his
relatives and got horoscope and profile of the petitioner and found that
both himself and the petitioner's horoscopes matched well and
accordingly, betrothel was arranged on 28.10.2018 at Madhuram Hall,
Arani and the marriage was fixed on 10.02.2019.
9.According to the fourth respondent, as he is working in abroad,
the family members wanted him to take the petitioner along with him
immediately after the marriage. According to the petitioner, due to
wrong advice and inadvertently they had registered the marriage on
31.10.2018 at SRO, Arani in Serial No.168 of 2018 based on betrothel
arrangements. According to the fourth respondent, he found there was a
difference in behaviour towards him by the petitioner and she was not
fully interested in marrying him and consequently, there was a difference
of opinion between the family members despite several attempts being
made, the issues could not be reconciled and finally both family members
decided to call-off the wedding.
10.The fourth respondent further submits that he and the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
executed a cancellation of marriage deed dated 13.12.2019 in the
presence of both family members and agreed to cancel the registration of
marriage. According to the fourth respondent, there was no
solemnization of marriage between him and the petitioner and the
marriage was registered mistakenly and inadvertently. The fourth
respondent submits that as already they had executed a cancellation of
marriage deed dated 13.02.2019 declaring the cancellation of marriage
and to cancel the registration of marriage.
11.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel
for the fourth respondent and perused the materials available on record.
12.On perusal of the records, it is seen that the marriage was
solemnised on 28.10.2018 at Madhuram Hall, Arani Tiruvannamalai
registered on 31.10.2018. Both the parties have signed the register
stating that the marriage has been already got over on 28.10.2018 and as
per the documents, they are legally husband and wife. The witnesses
were also signed the same would show that the entire process has been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
followed by the petitioner and the fourth respondent. The averment
made by the petitioner that she has been cheated and the marriage has
been stopped, as no marriage has been performed cannot be accepted
from the fact that on the registration certificate, it has been stated that the
marriage has already solemnised on 28.10.2018 at Madhuram Hall
alleged to have been the date of marriage that as the betrothal ceremony.
It is submitted by the petitioner that the fourth respondent is refusing to
come forward for marry her again will not stand in the eye of law. As per
documents, both becomes the husband and wife. There is a document
filed before this Court in Rs.20/- stamp paper that both are signed in the
same stating that they also reiterate that clause 5 as the fourth respondent
is inclined to take the petitioner to Singapore for processing visa and
passport application. The petitioner's family accepted to register the
marriage and both the family also given their consent for the same and
only on 31.10.2018 the marriage has been registered. Thereafter, there
was some dispute arose between the petitioner and the fourth respondent
families and hence the marriage was stopped.
13.On going through all the citations referred to supra, wherein
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
those parties have been suffered by registration of marriage without their
consent or fraud or any other mode of compulsion. But in the present
case, where the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent and their
family members willingly with consent went for registering the marriage
only for the purpose of processing Singapore Visa and passport
application.
14.In view of the above, this Court is of the view that there is no
fraud or coercion made against any of the persons for registering such
marriage and no fraud took place and this Court is not inclined to cancel
the same. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the
concerned Court for filing an appropriate application as desired by the
petitioner.
15.With the above observation, the writ petition is dismissed. No
costs.
31.08.2021
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
Speaking Order:yes/no
pam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
To
1.The Inspector General of Registrar,
Santhome High Road, Chennai.
2.The Deputy Registrar,
O/o. District Registrar,
Paikinar Village,
Cheiyar Thiruvannamalai District.
3.The Sub Registrar (Marriage Registrar),
O/o. Sub Registrar,
No.7, Kottai South Street,
Arani.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.
pam
W.P.No.10106 of 2021
31.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
