Mandatory for atleast one spouse to be the resident of the state to register marriage in that particular state: The High Court of Kerela

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P FRIDAY THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 21ST JYAISHTA 1943 WP(C) NO. 11832 OF 2021 AGED 26 YEARS S O. RENET JOHN PYNADATHKARUKUTTY P.O ANGAMALY ANU THOMAS AGED 24 YEARS D O. THOMAS K.A KUDIYIRIPPILMATTOOR KALADY ERNAKULAM 683574 BY ADV P.JINISH PAUL STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT TRIVANDRUM 695 001 THE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR ANGAMALY ERNAKULAM PIN 683572 SMT. VIDHYA A.C. GOVT. PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.06.2021 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPNo.11832 2021 2 JUDGMENT DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF JUNE 2021 The petitioners have approached this court with a grievance that they are not being permitted to register their marriage under the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act 1920. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that the 2nd respondent could not permit registration of the marriage under the provisions of the aforesaid Act since the petitioners were not residents of erstwhile Cochin State. It is submitted that the aforesaid Act applies only to the residents of erstwhile Cochin State. Today the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record Ext.P11 certificate issued by the Village Officer Karukutty which shows that the 1st petitioner is a resident of the erstwhile Cochin State. It is not disputed that if one of the parties to the marriage reside within the territorial limits of erstwhile Cochin State the marriage can be registered under the provisions of the Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to accept Ext.P2 and treat notice of marriage as having been given on the date that Ext.P2 was filed and cause registration of the marriage of the petitioners under the provisions of the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act 1920. If there are any defects in the application made by the petitioners the WPNo.11832 2021 3 petitioners shall immediately cure such defects to enable the 2nd respondent to comply with the directions issued as above. If the petitioners present themselves before the 2nd respondent on 14 06 2021 the marriage shall be registered under the provisions of the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act 1920 on the same day if necessary by waiving the notice period WPNo.11832 2021 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11832 2021 Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MAIL RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE COMPANY THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF MARRIAGE DATED 01.06.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER THE TRUE COPY OF THE MAIL SENT ON 02.06.2021 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THE TRUE COPY OF THE MAP OF THE COCHIN STATE AVAILABLE IN ONLINE IN THE SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS OFFICE THE TRUE COPY OF A MAP OF THE COCHIN STATE AVAILABLE THE TRUE COPY OF SO CALLED MAP OF TRAVANCORE STATE RELIED UPON BY THE RESPONDENTS THE TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF WIKIPEDIA OF KINGDOM OF COCHIN AVAILABLE ONLINE THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 30163 2019 DATED THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) 19216 2012 DATED THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) 11576 2021 DATED THE TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 09.06.2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER KARUKUTTUY VILLAGE

Summary: The Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act, 1920 mandates the couple to be residents of the Cochin State in order to register their marriage under the aforesaid act, however It is not disputed that if one of the parties to the marriage reside within the territorial limits of erstwhile Cochin State, the marriage can be registered under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. The above mentioned has been proclaimed by the Kerela High Court in the case of Frederic Renet and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Anr. [WP(C) NO. 11832 OF 2021] which was passed by a single judge bench comprising Justice Gopinath P. on 11th June 2021. The facts of the case are as follows. The petitioners had approached the court with a grievance that they were not being permitted to register their marriage under the Cochin Christian Civil Marriage Act, 1920. In an explanation for the same, it was contended by the Government pleader that sub registrar could not permit such a registration because under the provisions of the aforesaid Act since the petitioners were not residents of erstwhile Cochin State. It was submitted that the aforesaid Act applies only to the residents of erstwhile Cochin State. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner produced the certificate on behalf of the petitioner that was issued by the Village Officer, Karukutty which shows that the 1 st petitioner is a resident of the erstwhile Cochin State.