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

2023 Supreme(Ker) 355

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, SOPHY THOMAS
X – Appellant
Versus
NIL – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Dhanya P. Ashokan, M.R. Venugopal, S. Muhammad Alikhan.

JUDGMENT :

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

1. This appeal is of a peculiar nature. The appellants by entering into a registered agreement on 19.02.2006, started living together. In that relationship, they have a 16 years old child. They no longer want to live together. They lived as husband and wife for quite a long time. Both of them now want to get rid of the relationship. The first appellant is a Hindu and the 2nd appellant is Christian by faith. They moved a joint petition before the Family Court, Ernakulam invoking Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act for mutual divorce.

2. The Family Court, noting that the marriage was not solemnised under the Special Marriage Act, dismissed the petition for divorce. This is how the appellants have jointly come before us in this appeal.

3. We heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants-Dhanya P. Ashokan at length.

4. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, when both parties accepted their relationship as a marriage by declaration, it is not for the Court to decide that they are legally married or not. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the registration under the Registration Act itself would be sufficient to forti

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