PANKAJ MITHAL
Nainsee – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
Pankaj Mithal, J.
Heard leaned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioners are claiming protection to their married life alleging unnecessary interference and harassment by respondent no.4 despite their registered marriage.
3. Petitioners who have filed this petition jointly with the joint affidavit enclosing a photocopy of the marriage certificate dated 27th July 2015 issued by the Registrar, Hindu Marriages, Basti.
4. The marriage certificate mentions12th May 1995 as the date of birth of petitioner no. 1.
5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 a copy of High School mark sheet of petitioner no. 1 has been enclosed which mentions her date of birth as 16.5.1998.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners accepts the above High School certificate that the date of birth as mentioned therein to be correct.
7. In view of the above High School certificate the date of birth of the petitioner is 16.5.1998 and not 12.5.1995 as mentioned in the marriage certificate.Therefore, petitioner no. 1 is a minor not entitle to marry legally.
8. The Registrar, Hindu Marriages, Basti is present in the Court. He submits that the office was satisfied about the date of birth of pe
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.