High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition allowed; directions issued to sol...

ARUN A v. MARRIAGE OFFICER (SUB-REGISTRAR), KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
Judgment Date
2023-07-07
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is allowed. Ext-P5 is quashed. The respondent is directed to solemnize the marriage based on Ext-P10 notice immediately under the Special Marriage Act, in accordance with SMA, taking note of Ext-P8 divorce decree. The petitioner must produce certified copies of this judgment and the writ petition before the respondent for compliance.
Final Disposition
Writ petition allowed; directions issued to solemnize the marriage under the Special Marriage Act; Ext P5 quashed; compliance to be ensured with certified copies.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • ARUN A

Respondents

  • The MARRIAGE OFFICER (SUB-REGISTRAR), KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • P. A NOOP (MULAVANA)

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Advocate General Office Kerala, Sri. B.S. Syamantak, GP

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, Arun A, a British citizen by naturalization, filed WP(C) 21638/2023 seeking mandamus to solemnize his marriage under the Special Marriage Act (SMA) upon Ext-P10 notice and to recognize Ext-P8 divorce decree. He had married Anjana in 2011; a UAE divorce decree was issued by the UAE Personal Status Court, which Ext-P8 confirms as absolute on 30.11.2022. Petitioner asserts he is now a foreign citizen, backed by Ext-P3 and Ext-P4, and has submitted Ext-P10 notice for remarriage. The respondent Marriage Officer allegedly delayed action, with the Government Pleader noting lack of a single status certificate and an unclear divorce certificate before the Marriage Officer. The petitioner relied on a 2016 Kerala High Court judgment (Ext-P14) and on principle from Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi (1991) 3 SCC 451 to urge recognition of foreign divorce and registration of marriage under SMA. The Court examined these authorities, noting that foreign matrimonial judgments may be recognized if they conform to the matrimonial law applicable to the parties, especially where the respondent voluntarily submits to the foreign forum’s jurisdiction. The Court ultimately allowed the writ petition, quashed Ext-P5, and directed the respondent to solemnize the marriage under SMA with notice Ext-P10, while noting Ext-P8. Produce certified copies for compliance. The decision furthers cross-border matrimonial rights while ensuring due legal process.

Provisions of Law Cited

Special Marriage Act, 1954Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 13

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that his divorce from his UAE-based marriage with Anjana was granted by the UAE Personal Status Court in 2022 (Ext-P8). He is a British citizen (Ext-P3, Ext-P4) and has submitted Ext-P10, a notice under the Special Marriage Act intending remarriage. He argues that Indian courts recognize foreign divorces under CPC Section 13 and long-recognized principles (as in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi) to permit solemnization under SMA when the foreign judgment is valid and the parties voluntarily submit to the foreign court’s jurisdiction; Ext-P14 (a prior Kerala HC decision) supports relief. The petitioner submitted that Ext-P5 communication should be quashed and the respondent should solemnize the marriage according to SMA provisions, taking note of Ext-P8. Respondents-The respondent argued the petitioner failed to produce a single status certificate and did not disclose foreign citizenship; the divorce decree presented was unclear, and verification was required. The Government Pleader noted the need for clear documentation before acting, emphasizing procedural compliance and the potential need for foreign-judgment recognition when jurisdiction is not identical to Indian matrimonial law.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent relied on the absence of a single status certificate and concerns about the clarity of the UAE divorce certificate presented by the petitioner. The Government Pleader argued that Ext-P8’s recognition requires clear, verifiable status and documentary support, and that the court should follow established rules to avoid circular or conflicting orders. He emphasized the need for compliance with domestic law (SMA) and CPC 13 principles, while acknowledging Ext-P14 as persuasive but contingent on proper proof and jurisdictional alignment.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi(1991) 3 SCC 451PositiveCited to set down the rule that recognition of foreign matrimonial judgments depends on conformity with the matrimonial law applicable to the parties; outlines exceptions (forum jurisdiction, voluntary submission, consent) in Section 13 CPC.
Judgment in WP(C) No. 26008/2016, dated 23.09.2016WP(C) No. 26008/2016PositiveExt-P14 judgment referenced as precedent supporting recognition of foreign divorce certificates and directing order similar relief.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against ARUN A v. MARRIAGE OFFICER (SUB-REGISTRAR), KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN ``` ``` FRIDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF JULY 2023 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1945 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` PETITIONER: ``` ``` ARUN A AGED 37 YEARS ( BRITISH PASSPORT NO 123030205) S/O ARJUNAN K, CHIRATHILA VEEDU, KARAKULAM PO, THIRUVANANTHPURAM,, PIN - 695564 BY ADV P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) ``` ## **`RESPONDENT:`** ``` THE MARRIAGE OFFICER (SUB-REGISTRAR) KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695564 BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA SRI.B.S.SYAMANTAK, GP ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. =================== WP(C) No. 21638 OF 2023** ## **=================== Dated this the 7[th] day of July 2023** ## **J U D G M E N T** ## The above writ petition is filed with the following ## prayers; “ i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent herein to solemnize the marriage by accepting Ext-P10 notice immediately under Special Marriage Act in accordance with the provision contained in the said Act by taking note of Ext P8 divorce decree. ii. Declare that the respondent is duty bound to accept Ext-P8 and to allow the petitioner for registering his marriage under Special Marriage Act. iii. Grant such other reliefs as this Honorable Court would deem fit and proper. iv. Dispense with production of filing translation of vernacular documents ” (SIC) 2. The petitioner was an Indian citizen earlier and ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 3 ``` now he is a British citizen which is evident by Exts.P3 and P4 British passports. The petitioner married one Anjana in the year 2011 and subsequently because of difference of opinion between them, a divorce application was filed before the Family Court in HM Courts and Tribunal Services in U.K., which is evident by Ext.P6. It is submitted that the HM Court heard the matter in detail and passed the decree of divorce absolute on 30.11.2022 as evident by Ext.P8. The petitioner wanted to remarry and hence submitted a notice of intended marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 to the respondent herein as per Ex.P10. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the respondent is not acting upon Ext.P10 notice. The petitioner herein sent a legal notice to the respondent as evident by Ext.P11. Even then, there is no response. Hence, this writ petition is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` delivered Ext.P14 judgment and hence similar directions may be passed in this case also. 5. The learned Government Pleader made available the instructions received from the respondent, it is stated that the petitioner has not produced the single status certificate and also the petitioner has not disclosed the fact that he is a foreign citizen. It is also submitted that the divorce certificate produced before the Marriage Officer is not clear. 6. This Court considered the contentions of the petitioner and the respondent. This Court also perused Ext.P14 judgment, it will be better to extract the relevant portion of Ext.P14 and the same is extracted hereunder; 6. Having regard to the need of the hour to have definite rules for recognition of foreign judgments in personal and family matters, particularly in matrimonial disputes, in **Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi, (1991) 3 SCC 451,** the Apex Court has interpreted Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure as follows: “20. From the aforesaid discussion the following ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 5 ``` rule can be deduced for recognising a foreign matrimonial judgment in this country. The jurisdiction assumed by the foreign court as well as the grounds on which the relief is granted must be in accordance with the matrimonial law under which the parties are married. The exceptions to this rule may be as follows: (i) where the matrimonial action is filed in the forum where the respondent is domiciled or habitually and permanently resides and the relief is granted on a ground available in the matrimonial law under which the parties are married; (ii) where the respondent voluntarily and effectively submits to the jurisdiction of the forum as discussed above and contests the claim which is based on a ground available under the matrimonial law under which the parties are married; (iii) where the respondent consents to the grant of the relief although the jurisdiction of the forum is not in accordance with the provisions of the matrimonial law of the parties.” It is thus evident that though the general rule is that a foreign matrimonial judgment can be recognized in India only if the jurisdiction assumed by the foreign court as well as the grounds on which the relief is ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` granted are in accordance with the matrimonial law under which the parties are married, such judgments can be accepted as conclusive in India where the respondent voluntarily and effectively submits to the jurisdiction of the forum and consents to the grant of the relief although the jurisdiction of the forum is not in accordance with the provisions of the matrimonial law of the parties. As stated above, the materials on record indicate beyond doubt that the petitioner and his divorced wife have voluntarily and effectively submitted to the jurisdiction of the UAE Personal Status Court and consented to grant divorce to each other, although the jurisdiction of the said forum is not in accordance with the provisions of the matrimonial law applicable to them. In the circumstances, I am of the view that the courts in India have to recognise Ext.P4 divorce certification. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P5 communication is quashed and the respondent is directed to solemnize the marriage, for which notice has been issued by the petitioner under the Special Marriage Act, in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Act.” ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` 7. After going through the above judgment, I think, there can be a direction following the dictum in the above judgment. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner; i. There will be a direction to respondent to solemnize the marriage based on Ext.P10 notice, if it is otherwise in order immediately under the Special marriage Act, in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Act by taking note of Ext.P8 divorce decree. ii. The petitioners will produce a certified copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition before the respondent for compliance. ``` Sd/- ``` ## **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** ## **JUDGE** LU ``` WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21638/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS : ``` ``` EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CONSULATE GENERAL OF INDIA, BIRHINGAM DATED 02.12.2020 EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF NATURALIZATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY SECRETARY OF STATE ,HOME OFFICE LONDON AS A BRITISH CITIZEN DATED 10.11.2020 EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE BRITISH PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 02.12.2020 EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE OF THE PETITIONER AND THE SAID ANJANA DATED 22.12.2011 EXHIBIT P6A TRUE COPY OF THE DIVORCE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 27.01.2022 EXHIBIT P7A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 27.01.2022 EXHIBIT P8A TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE OF THE FAMILY COURT IN HM COURTS AND TRIBUNAL SERVICES DATED 30.11.2022 EXHIBIT P9A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF NATURALIZATION ISSUED TO THE SAID ANJANA BY SECRETARY OF STATE, OFFICE OF LONDON DATED 10.11.2020 EXHIBIT P10A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NOTICE OF INTENDED MARRIAGE ISSUED BY DEPT. OF REGISTRATION KERALA, DATED 15.05.2023 EXHIBIT P11A TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE DATED 25.05.2023 EXHIBIT P12A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 26.05.2023 EXHIBIT P13A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD DATED 27.05.2023 EXHIBIT P14A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO. 26008/2016 DATED 23.09.2016 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 21638 OF 2023`** ``` EXHIBIT P15 ``` ``` A TRUE COPY OF THE RETURN AIR TICKET OF THE PETITIONER DATED 12.02.2023 ``` ``` // True Copy // PA To Judge ```