Disposed

Daljeet Kaur and Anr. v. Registrar of Marriage , Jalandhar

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Apr 2012CWP/10051/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenging the failure of the Registrar to register a Hindu marriage was disposed of. The Court directed the Registrar to decide the marriage registration application by passing a speaking order within 15 days if re-presented.

What did the court decide?

Directed that the Registrar must decide the marriage registration application by passing a speaking order within 15 days if re-presented.

Daljeet Kaur and Anr. Vs Registrar of Marriage , Jalandhar — Punjab & Haryana HC (2012) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP No. 10051 of 2011

¶3

Date of Decision: 19.4.2012

¶4

Daljeet Kaur and another

¶5

....Petitioners.

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Registrar of Marriage, Jalandhar

¶8

...Respondent.

¶9

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.

¶10

PRESENT: Mr. Vinay Puri, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Jaswinder Singh, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶13

The petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to register the marriage of the petitioners as all the legal requirements as per Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short “the Act”) have been complied with.

¶14

It has been averred in the petition that petitioner No.1 was born on 1.2.1986 and is a graduate whereas the date of birth of petitioner No.2 is 1.6.1985 and their marriage was solemnized on 1.11.2010. Thereafter, an application was furnished to the respondent for registration of the marriage. As per the averments made in the petition, the file in original has been returned to the Advocate of the petitioners. According to the petitioners, this action of the respondent is illegal as the respondent could either register the marriage or refuse to register the same by passing a speaking order if it was in violation of the

¶15

CWP No. 10051 of 2011 -2-

¶16

provisions of the Act. The respondent could not have returned the file as has been done by him.

¶17

Learned State counsel though has made efforts to justify the action of the respondent yet states that in case the petitioners present the application again for registration of their marriage and appear before the respondent, the respondent shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law.

¶18

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioners present application for registration of their marriage, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by passing a speaking order within a period of 15 days from the date of presentation of the said application.

¶19

April 19, 2012 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE

Daljeet Kaur and Anr. v. Registrar of Marriage , Jalandhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Daljeet Kaur and Anr. v. Registrar of Marriage , Jalandhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Bhardwaj Vs State of Haryana

M/S Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Satish Chadha Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sarbjit Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Maheshwari Rice Mill Malerkotla Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ramesh Chand Vs State of Punjab & Ors.