The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for valid marriage solemnization under the Hindu Marriage Act and the conditions for registration of marriages under the Special Marriage Act.

S K GANGELE, J.

1. Appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 25.09.2017 passed by the Court Principal Judge, Family Court, Panna in Hindu Marriage Case No.45/2015.

2. Appellant filed an application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 read with Section 22 of Special Marriage Act, 1954 for restitution of conjugal rights. He pleaded that an agreement of marriage between appellant and respondent was executed before Notary District Panna on 11.01.2010. On the basis of aforesaid agreement, an application was filed before the Collector/District Marriage Registration Officer, Panna to issue certificate of marriage in accordance with the provision of Special Marriage Act 1954. Proceedings were conducted thereafter, marriage certificate was issued on 23.02.2010. Respondent was living separately, she did not come to live with the appellant to perform obligation of marriage hence, decree of restitution of conjugal rights be passed.

3. Respondent in her reply denied the fact that any marriage was solemnized between appellant and respondent. She further pleaded that agreement prepared by the appellant before the Notary dated 11.01.2010 is forged and fabricated document, it is ab initio void. Notary was not authorized to execute the agreement in regard to marriage. She denied the fact that any application was filed before the Collector for certification of marriage and when the marriage was not solemnized, there was no question of issuance of certificate of marriage. The proceedings were conducted before the Collector are not in accordance with law. The respondent did not live with the appellant. Respondent also filed counter-claim declaring the certificate of marriage dated 23.02.2010 as null and void.

4. Trial Court dismissed the suit filed by the appellant for restitution of conjugal rights. The Court further allowed the counterclaim of the respondent and declared the marriage certificate dated 23.02.2010 as null and void, after holding that there was no valid marriage solemnized between appellant and respondent hence, there was no question for issuance of marriage certificate under Special Marriage Act 1954.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant has contended that there is sufficient evidence that marriage was solemnized between appellant and respondent. Trial Court has committed an error in holding that there was no valid marriage between appellant and respondent.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that there is no evidence on record produced by the appellant that marriage of appellant with the respondent was solemnized in accordance with Hindu rituals hence, the Court has recorded proper findings.

7. Appellant in his affidavit deposed that there was a love relationship between appellant and respondent. Both had executed an agreement on 11.01.2010 which was certified by the Notary Ramroop Tiwari. They had performed marriage with each other. Thereafter, both filed application before the Collector Panna in accordance with the provisions of Special Marriage Act for issuance of marriage certificate. Respondent used to live with the appellant upto 18.03.2013 at Tikuria Mohalla, Panna as wife thereafter, she quarreled with the appellant. In his cross-examination he deposed that the agreement of marriage was executed between him and the respondent which was certified by the Notary. He further pleaded that no rituals of marriage were performed at Jabalpur. Rituals were performed at Panna. During marriage my mother Pushpa Sharma, two sisters Swati Sharma and Shweta Sharma were present.

Saptapadi was performed by Someshwar Sharma. Mr. Ramrup Tiwari verified that both the parties executed the agreement. Reader of the Collector witness no.4 verified the fact that on 23.10.2010 a certificate was issued from the Office.

8. The document in regard to application filed before the Collector Panna for certificate of marriage and the statements of appellant and respondent have also been fil