A marriage between a Hindu man and a Christian woman is not valid under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, unless the woman has converted to Hinduism before the marriage. A marriage certificate issued by a Marriage Officer under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, is not effective if the parties do not reside within the district of the Marriage Officer for the required period of time.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against judgement dated 31-7-91 passed by the 10th Addl. District Judge, Indore, in civil suit No. 19-A/90, dismissing plaintiff-appellant's suit for declaration that no marriage had taken place between him and respondent Miss Eveline Jobe and the marriage certificate (Ex. P. 1) dated 1-3-86 issued by the Marriage Officer, Calcutta and 24 Parganas, was null and void.

( 2 ) ADMITTED facts of the case are that the plaintiff-appellant born on 2-3-63 is a Hindu by religion. His parents are also Hindus by religion. At the time of alleged marriage he had completed 23 years; while the defendant respondent who is Christian by religion was about 30 years of age in the year 1985-86. Her parents are also Christian by birth. It is the appellant's case that sometime in the month of March, 1986 the defendant-respondent started distributing photo-copies of marriage certificate (Ex. P. 1) amongst friends and also filed complaint in the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Indore, complaining that the plaintiff-appellant who was her husband had been wrongfully detained by his parents. Having come to know of such complaint being filed, the plaintiff-appellant on his own appeared before the said Court at Indore and submitted that he had never been wrongfully detained by his parents. He had also sworn an affidavit to the effect that he had never married the defendant-respondent. As an off shoot of these proceedings he also filed a civil suit in the Court of District Judge, Indore, seeking a declaration to the effect that no marriage took place between the plaintiff and the respondent, coupled with the prayer that the certificate of marriage dated 1-3-86 issued by the Marriage Officer, Calcutta and 24 Pargana was null and void and the registration of the said marriage was of no effect. The appellant has detailed the circumstances under which he was forced to sign the marriage application form under threat and intimidation in the Court of the Marriage Officer, Calcutta and 24 Pargana; although as a matter of fact no marriage as such had ever taken place between the two. ( 3 ) IT was the appellant's case that his signatures were obtained under threat of committing suicide by the defendant-respondent in addition to force and coercion. He further pleaded that even under the law no Hindu marriage could take place between the plaintiff and the respondent and the Marriage Officer had not complied with the provisions of S. 16 and that she had no territorial jurisdiction.

( 4 ) THE defendant-respondent in her written statement filed on 26-4-88 admitted that she was Christian by religion from her birth and was about 30 years and that her parents were also Christian by birth. The allegations about threat or intimidation by force or coercion were denied.

( 5 ) IT was the defendant-respondent's pleaded case that she had married the appellant on 6-10-85 in Kali Ghat temple at Calcutta according to Hindu customs and rites and contended that the marriage certificate (Ex. P. 1) was a valid one. One of her special pleadings was that she had got married on 6-10-85 and thereafter lived as husband and wife. The objection as regards territorial jurisdiction was also raised.

( 6 ) THE trial Court on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed the following issues :- (1) Did the petitioner sign the marriage application (in form No. 4) under intimidation and threats of suicide by the non-applicant ? (b) Did the marriage officer not make the necessary inquiry before signing the marriage certificate ? (c) Whether the certificate of marriage obtained by the non-applicant by practising threats, intimidation, coercion, or fear of physical harm to the petitioner ? (2) Whether, as such, no marriage, in reality was performed between the petitioner and the non-applicant ? (3) Whether the marriage under Ss. 15 and 16 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 could not have been performed between the parties to the suit ? (4) Whether the marriage