The court determined that marriage validity rests on adherence to Hindu customary rites, despite tribal origins, affirming legal recognition under the Hindu Marriage Act after analyzing both parties' evidence.

1. Through the present Appeal filed under Section 19 of The Family Courts Act, 1984 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], the Appellant assails the correctness of the judgment dated 09.02.2024 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Judgment’] passed by the learned Family Court.

2. The Appellant preferred an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, seeking rejection of the Respondent’s petition under Section 13(1)(i)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [hereinafter referred to as ‘ HMA ’], contending that the proceedings were not maintainable in view of the statutory exclusion contained in Section 2 (2) of the HMA .

BRIEF FACTUAL MATRIX:

3. In order to comprehend the issues involved in the present case, the relevant facts, in brief, are required to be noticed.

4. The Appellant/Husband is employed as an Assistant Executive Engineer in the Irrigation Department of the State of Andhra Pradesh. The Respondent/Wife is an Indian Administrative Service (‘IAS’) Officer belonging to the Uttar Pradesh Cadre.

5. The marriage between the Appellant and the Respondent was solemnized on 02.02.1998. The factum of solemnization of marriage remains undisputed in the present matter. On 13.03.1999, a child was born out of the said wedlock. The Appellant has asserted in his Affidavit, Examination in Chief dated March 2023 that the parties was performed in accordance with the rites and customs prevalent in the Lambada (Banjara) Community, and not strictly as per Hindu religious ceremonies. He deposed as follows:

“4. Deponent states that he being Assistant Executive Engineer with Irrigation Department in the State of Andhra Pradesh got his marriage solemnized with Petitioner, who was then 18 years old on 02.02.1998 at Ramagundam then in the state of Andhra Pradesh as per customary rites and ceremonies of the tribal community of Lambadis (Banjara) without ‘Saptapadi’ and with an exception that some rites/ customs of the community being also followed in Hindu marriages.

…………………………………….

14. I say that deponent’s marriage with Petitioner was solemnized in accordance with customary rites/ tradition/ principles prevailing in Lambadis ‘Banjara’ community with an exception that some rites/ customs of the community being followed in Hindu marriages too which undeniably cannot take away status of a subject tribe of the ‘Lambadis’ community as the tribe in question is not ‘Hinduised’ yet are still following their customary law/ rites and customs.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

6. On the other hand, the Respondent has asserted in her Affidavit, Examination in Chief that the said marriage was performed in accordance with Hindu rites and ceremonies. The deposed are as follows:

“8……my marriage with the Respondent was solemnized according to the Hindu Customary rites and rituals following all the traditions. During the marriage ceremony, I was wearing a red dress and ‘Bichiya’ (a toe ring) in my toe fingers, which is the symbolical image of a Hindu bride. The Respondent applied ‘Alta’ (Red dye or ‘maharam’ on my foot, tied a nuptical garland i.e. a ‘mangalsutra’ around my neck and finally we took the ‘saatpheras’ in front of the sacred fire, in presence of all our relatives family and the Hindu priest who was there for the solemnization of the marriage…..

9. That the Lambada tribal community has been sufficiently hinduised and are not completely separate from Hindu culture or traditions.”

(Emphasis Supplied)

7. In view of the aforestated facts, as corroborated from the respective contentions of the parties, the primary issue in dispute pertains to the mode and validity of the alleged solemnization of marriage. The Respondent asserts that the marriage was perform