The Court held that a divorce by talaq under Muslim Law is a valid ground for remarriage without a court order for Special Marriage Act purposes.
The 2nd respondent shall accept the application and issue notice and solemnise the marriage intended by the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/15TH SRAVANA, 1937
WP(C).No. 15734 of 2015 (N)
PETITIONER(S) :
SHAINA, D/O.MAJEED, MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOOLIMUTTAM P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.SHAJU PURUSHOTHAMAN SRI.K.S.RAJESH
RESPONDENT(S) :
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
2. THE SUB REGISTRAR,
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.JAMAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 15734 of 2015 (N)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF INTENDED MARRIAGE DATED 11.12.2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
W.P(C). No.15734 of 2015
Dated this the 6th day of August, 2015.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that, the petitioner's application for marriage under Section 5 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 [for brevity, the Act of 1954], before the 2nd respondent, is not being taken up for reason of the petitioner having not produced any order from the competent Court, regarding the factum of divorce. The petitioner's first husband is said to be no more and she is also said to have obtained a divorce from the second husband. The divorce obtained from the second husband is on pronouncing 'talaq' as is permitted under the Muslim Law. Sufficient reliance can be placed
on Shemi P. Ali v. State of Kerala (2009 [3] KLT 167) ,
paragraph 5 of which is relevant and is extracted hereunder:
“5. Authentication of divorce by competent court is one of the methods of providing a
W.P(C). No.15734 of 2015
2
divorce or even the existence of a remarriage. But it is not the only method. Divorce resultant upon a 'talaq' pronounced by her husband is a mode of divorce that is accepted in the Muslim Community.”
v. Passport Officer [2009 (3) KLT 180] . Though such
decisions are with respect to the issuance of a Passport, the law
is not different even in the case under the Act of 1954.
In such circumstance, the 2nd respondent shall accept the application and issue notice and solemnise the marriage intended by the petitioner under Section 5 of the Act of 1954.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
sp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Sub Registrar must reject a marriage application under the Special Marriage Act solely because the petitioner did not produce a court order authenticating a Muslim divorce by talaq.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shemi P. Ali v. State of KeralaRelied on¶30
Shemi P. Ali v. State of Kerala (2009 [3] KLT 167)
Abdul Khader Nissar v. Passport OfficerRelied on¶36
Abdul Khader Nissar v. Passport Officer [2009 (3) KLT 180]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHAINA
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION
THE SUB REGISTRAR MATHILAKAM
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
K. VINOD CHANDRAN
Parties & counsel
