Posts
Source: The Times of India dated 10.1.2014
Mumbai: A decade after a Mulund resident went against her parents’ wish and married her childhood sweetheart, a Christian boy, the Bombay high court has dismissed her plea to annul the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.
A division bench of Justice Vijaya Kapse Tahilramani and Justice V L Achliya said the Act was applicable only when both the spouses are Hindus.
“The provisions of Hindu Marriage Act can be applicable when both the spouses are Hindus and their marriage is performed according to Hindu rites. The marriage has to be valid within the meaning of the Act. It is also necessary that at the time of filing a divorce petition, both the spouses are Hindus by religion, except if one of them is seeking divorce on the grounds that the other person had converted to another religion,” said the bench while upholding a family court order, refusing to entertain a petition filed by Nilanjana Simha seeking her marriage to Rajesh D’Souza be declared null and void under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The court said Rajesh, who is now settled in Hyderabad, was a Christian at the time of the marriage and still one.
Nilanjana claimed she married Rajesh under Hindu rituals in 1999. Her lastditch plea to the court that her husband had concealed the fact that he was a Christian was also thrown out.
The judges pointed out that in her petition, she had said her parents and her husband’s parents were family friends and her family had opposed their wedding as they belonged to different religions. The HC further referred to Rajesh’s surname, (D’Souza), “which is distinctly Christian and can never be a Hindu surname”.
“Not only (Nilanjana) mentioned in the divorce petition that she did not know at the time of the marriage that Rajesh was not a Hindu but it is also evident that from his surname and other facts, it was clear to her that (her husband) was a Christian at the time of the marriage. It is too late in the day to contend that her consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud,” said the bench.
“Now Nilanjana cannot contend that Rajesh had concealed the fact from her that he was a Christian and therefore, she is entitled to a decree of nullity on the grounds that her consent was obtained by fraud by concealing the fact that he was a Christian,” the court said.
(Names changed to protect the couple’s identity)
HC refuses to end marriage under Hindu Act
Says The Law Applicable Only If Both Spouses Are Hindu
Shibu Thomas TNN
Mumbai: A decade after a Mulund resident went against her parents’ wish and married her childhood sweetheart, a Christian boy, the Bombay high court has dismissed her plea to annul the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.
A division bench of Justice Vijaya Kapse Tahilramani and Justice V L Achliya said the Act was applicable only when both the spouses are Hindus.
“The provisions of Hindu Marriage Act can be applicable when both the spouses are Hindus and their marriage is performed according to Hindu rites. The marriage has to be valid within the meaning of the Act. It is also necessary that at the time of filing a divorce petition, both the spouses are Hindus by religion, except if one of them is seeking divorce on the grounds that the other person had converted to another religion,” said the bench while upholding a family court order, refusing to entertain a petition filed by Nilanjana Simha seeking her marriage to Rajesh D’Souza be declared null and void under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The court said Rajesh, who is now settled in Hyderabad, was a Christian at the time of the marriage and still one.
Nilanjana claimed she married Rajesh under Hindu rituals in 1999. Her lastditch plea to the court that her husband had concealed the fact that he was a Christian was also thrown out.
The judges pointed out that in her petition, she had said her parents and her husband’s parents were family friends and her family had opposed their wedding as they belonged to different religions. The HC further referred to Rajesh’s surname, (D’Souza), “which is distinctly Christian and can never be a Hindu surname”.
“Not only (Nilanjana) mentioned in the divorce petition that she did not know at the time of the marriage that Rajesh was not a Hindu but it is also evident that from his surname and other facts, it was clear to her that (her husband) was a Christian at the time of the marriage. It is too late in the day to contend that her consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud,” said the bench.
“Now Nilanjana cannot contend that Rajesh had concealed the fact from her that he was a Christian and therefore, she is entitled to a decree of nullity on the grounds that her consent was obtained by fraud by concealing the fact that he was a Christian,” the court said.
(Names changed to protect the couple’s identity)
No comments:
Post a Comment