Marriage Under Hindu Marriage Act Unsustainable If Either Party Is Not Governed By The Act: Telangana High Court

The High Court of Telangana, in a recent judgement, declared the marriage between a tribal woman and an SC man to be void, holding that a marriage registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, “cannot be sustained in law if one of the parties is not governed by the Act”. A Division Bench of Justice K. Lakshman and Justice Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy allowed an appeal filed by a Schedule Tribe woman and set aside a decree passed by the Family Court that had declined to declare the marriage void. The appellant, who admittedly belongs to the Scheduled Tribes, had approached the Family Court seeking dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the HMA, 1955. She contended that the marriage was brought about by coercion on the part of the respondent, who threatened her, and that the marriage was performed and registered under the HMA subsequently. The respondent denied the allegations and contended that the marriage was voluntary and that the parties married out of love for each other. Moreover, it was contended that the marriage had been consummated as well. The Family Court dismissed the petition, holding that the appellant/tribal woman had failed to establish cruelty or forcible marriage, and declined to declare the marriage void. Aggrieved by the decision, she approached the High Court in appeal. The appellant woman contested the very validity of the marriage in the appeal. It was argued that the alleged marriage between them was void since the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, held no application in the case, as she was a member of the Scheduled Tribes and hence outside the purview of the HMA as per Section 2 (2) of the Act. “It is not in dispute that the respondent belongs to SC Mala, whereas the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Tribe. The caste status of the parties thus stands admitted. It is also not in dispute that the marriage between the parties was registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and that it is alleged to have been solemnised in a temple according to Hindu rites and customs. The decisive question, therefore, is whether such registration or form of solemnization can confer validity when one of the parties is statutorily excluded from the operation of the Act”, the court said while foregrounding the central issue for deliberation. The Court, while deciding the matter, noted that section 2(2) of the Act expressly excludes members of the Scheduled Tribes from the application of the Act unless the Central Government, by notification, directs otherwise. It noted that it was not in dispute that no such notification had been issued extending the applicability of the Act to the appellant's tribe. While deciding the validity of the registration of such a marriage under HMA, the Court held that “A marriage registered under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, cannot be sustained in law if one of the parties is not governed by the Act. The applicability of a personal law statute flows from legislative mandate and not from the volition or conduct of the parties. Where a Hindu seeks to marry a person not amenable to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the legally permissible course is to contract such marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which is a secular enactment designed to govern such unions. In the present case, the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Tribe to which the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does not apply by virtue of Section 2(2). In the absence of any Central Government notification extending the Act, statutory exclusion continues to operate, and cannot be neutralised by registration, ceremony, or mutual consent”.Furthermore, on the question of whether the mere performance of marriage without pleading or proof that the woman was 'Hindunized', or governed by Hindu customs, was sufficient to draw applicability under the Act, the Court answered in the negative. It held that there was neither proof nor pleading to establish that she had abandoned Tribal customs or was governed exclusively by the Act, thus holding mere performance of marriage in such a case to be “legally insufficient”. The High Court further held that the Family Court had committed a jurisdictional error in adjudicating the matrimonial dispute under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, without first determining its statutory applicability to the appellant/ tribal woman, contending that “when jurisdiction itself is contingent upon such applicability, failure to adjudicate the same renders the entire exercise jurisdictionally infirm, warranting appellate interference”. Consequently, holding that the HMA was not applicable to the appellant, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the decree passed by the Family Court, thus, declaring the marriage void.Case Title: X v/s XCase No: Family Court Appeal No. 195 of 2014Click Here To Read/Download Order

Marriage Under Hindu Marriage Act Unsustainable If Either Party Is Not Governed By The Act: Telangana High Court

Preet Luthra

Tags