Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Hon’ble Bench of the Madras High Court comprising Justice KK Sasidharan and Justice PD Audikesavalu directed the Inspector General of Registration to issue a circular, mandating the registrars of marriage across the state to verify whether a marriage has occurred in accordance with the personal laws and customs.
Section 7 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 imposes an obligation on the registrar of marriage to make the aforementioned verification. This issue came up before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on an application filed by a lawyer named Kannan, who sought the court’s direction to amend the existing laws for making the physical presence of the marrying couple mandatory at the time of registration of their marriage.
The court observed that physical presence of the couple is mandatory except in exceptional justifiable circumstances, and where the physical presence is not possible, the registrar of marriage must record the justifiable reasons for registering their marriage. The court referred to two judgements—S. BalakrishnanPandiyan Vs. Superintendent of Police and E.Natarajan Vs. State. In the former case, marriage would have occurred secretly in the advocates' chamber, and that would not be held to have amounted to solemnization of marriage; and the court, in the said case, ruled that no marriage could be registered without the physical presence of the parties unless there is an exceptional circumstance.
In the latter case, the court had held that solemnization of marriage is imperative to validate such marriage as per various faiths as well as the necessity to comply with the secular nature of procedure established by law. The Court, having made the directions as stated above, said that the failure of the Registrar of Marriage in complying with the relevant laws would invite disciplinary action against him.
Insofar as the priest-cum-lawyers are concerned, unless there is a complaint made against advocates who certify the solemnization of marriage and register such marriages in contravention to the laws, there would be no appropriate action by the Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Bar Council against such advocates. The Balakrishnan case echoes the legal circumstances of such priest-cum-advocates, and the High Court in its order said that marriages that occur in the chambers of Advocates and Bar Association rooms would not amount to solemnization within the meaning of section 7 and section 7-A of Hindu Marriage Act. The case contained the following directives:
86540
103860
630
114
59824