SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Ker) 679

R.BHASKARAN
Rajeev – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


JUDGMENT

R. Bhaskaran, J.

1. This Original Petition is filed for a direction to the second respondent to accept the original of Ext. P1 and take necessary action on it. Ext. P1 is an application for registering the marriage under the Special Marriage Act. The submission of the learned counsel for petitioner is that the Registrar of Marriages has informed the petitioner that since one of the parties to the marriage is not an Indian citizen, the marriage cannot be registered. When this Original Petition came up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the marriage is not registered because Ext. P1 application is not properly filled up and if proper corrections are made in the application form, the marriage will be solemnised. Learned counsel for petitioner pointed out the decision reported in Marian Eva v. State of Himachal Pradesh (AIR 1993 Himachal Pradesh 7) which shows that even if one of the parties is not an Indian citizen, the marriage can be solemnized under the Special Marriage Act. The Act also does not contain any prohibition for solemnisation of the marriage, if one of the parties is a foreigner. Therefore, this Original Petition is allowed and the second

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top