Important Points:
The remedy of the petitioner lies elsewhere and he cannot make any application under Rule 13 of the Rules for the purposes mentioned in the application. It is relevant to note that the petitioner has not approached the Local Registrar under Rule 13 on his own. He has executed a power of attorney for that purpose. I do not think that a power of attorney holder of one of the parties to the marriage would be entitled to make an application under Rule 13. A power of attorney holder would not be entitled to say that an entry in the Register of Marriages (Common) or in the memorandum for registration is erroneous and therefore the entry is to be corrected or the registration is liable to be cancelled. A party to a marriage cannot relegate the right to apply under Rule 13 to a power of attorney holder.

JUDGMENT :

S. Manikumar, J

Challenging the judgment made in W.P(C). No.33608 of 2019 dated 23.1.2020, instant appeal is filed.

2. Facts in brief are as follows:

Appellant's son Mr. Niyas married 3rd respondent (Khairunnisa. P) and marriage was registered as per Kerala Registration of Marriage Rules on 16.6.2014. Niyas and the third respondent, for various reasons decided to separate and mutually agreed for pronouncing Talaq. They entered into an agreement on 23.5.2018, accepting Talaq. 3rd respondent is now married another person. As Niyas he is working abroad, appellant preferred Ext.P3 application dated 29.10.2019 before the concerned authorities for changing 3rd respondent's name as Niyas's wife, from visa, passport etc. Registrar of Birth, Death and Common Marriage, Valanchery Municipality (2nd respondent) has rejected the said application vide Ext.P4 notice stating that no court decree granting divorce has been submitted by the applicant and the parties to the marriage has not made any application for recording divorce. Hence writ petition was filed.

3. Writ court, after considering the rival submissions, observed thus:

“In pursuance to the notice issued by this Court, the learned Counsel for the Municipality expressed doubt over the maintainability on this writ petition on the premise that, the request for alteration or cancellation of entry in the files of the Registrar has been submitted by the father of the husband, Abdul Samad. By virtue of Section 13 of the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, parties referred to therein are husband and wife in the case of alteration of entries in the files of the Registrar. Section 13 read thus:

“Correction and cancellation of entries:(1) If the Local Registrar is satisfied either suo motu or on an application by the parties, that any entry in the Register of Marriages (Common is erroneous in form or substance or has been fraudulently or improperly made, he shall subject to conditions in sub-rule (2) make suitable corrections including cancellation of registration, noting the evidence for such corrections in the margin of the Register of Marriages (Common), without any alteration of the original entry and shall sign the marginal entry with the date of correction or cancellation and shall forward the particulars of the corrections to the Registrar General concerned.

(2) All corrections in material particulars like name, age date etc. and cancellation shall be done only with the sanction of the Registrar General concerned.

Provided that no such correction or cancellation shall be made without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned.

(3) On getting sanction under sub-rule (2) the Local Registrar shall effect the correction or cancellation, as the case may be, in the Register of Marriages (Common)

(4) An amount of rupees one hundred shall be charged as fee for making corrections in the Register of Marriages (Common) other than clerical mistakes.”

(5) In every case in which an entry is corrected or cancelled under this Rule, intimation thereof shall be sent to the parties to the marriage and the Local Registrar shall make a report giving necessary details to the Registrar General concerned.”

On going through the above provisions, I am also of the view that reference are to the parties and not to any third persons. Learned Counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submitted that the parties belonged to Muslim Community and the marriage has already been dissolved, and the only requirement is alteration of entries in the file of the Registrar. I am of the view that the afore-mentioned request cannot be considered, as the party should be either the husband or the 3rd respondent, wife. The reason that the husband is abroad will not preclude the 3rd respondent in making an application for alteration of entries in the files of the Registrar.

The writ petition, with the aforesaid observation, is disposed of.”

4. Being aggrieved, instant writ appeal is filed i