CMA/592/2021 of SELVAKUMAR Vs VISHNUPRIYA on 9 September 2026

Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Mala J.)

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the respondent/husband, challenging the judgment and decree dated 08.10.2020, made in HMOP.No.80/2018, by the Family Court, Cuddalore, dissolving the registered marriage of the petitioner/wife with the respondent, dated 03.07.2017.

The parties will be referred to as per their array before the Family Court.

The summary of facts are as follows:- The petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent on 03.07.2017, before the Joint Sub Registrar, Cuddalore. The petitioner stated that she and the respondent belong to the same village and so, they knew each other from their childhood. The petitioner graduated in B.Tech [Engineering] from IFET Engineering College, Gangarampalayam, Villupuram District. The petitioner after completion of her degree, got employment in the same College. The petitioner alleged that the respondent used to eve-tease her on her way to the College and while returning from the College. When the petitioner questioned the respondent, on his conduct, he challenged her by stating that nobody could stop him from marrying her. The petitioner further

CMA No. 592 of 2021

stated that there were several criminal cases filed against the respondent and therefore, she had absolutely no interest in him. The petitioner further alleged that she did not divulge the respondent's harassment to her parents since she feared his guts. While so, on 03.07.2017, the respondent along with his henchmen, approached the petitioner and coerced her to marry him. When the petitioner refused, the respondent threatened to kill her and her family members and thereafter, took her to the Joint Sub Registrar Office, Cuddalore, and forced her to sign the marriage register. The petitioner contended that the marriage was not conducted as per the Hindu rites and that, she had never gone with the respondent to JSK Marriage Hall at Thiruvandhipuram. She further alleged that immediately after the registered marriage, she was packed off to her parents house. The petitioner alleged that the respondent threatened to kill her family members if, she revealed the marriage and also took photographs with her by letting out the aforesaid threats. The petitioner alleged that due to the mental agony, she even fell sick in the evening of the same day and on compulsion of her parents, she revealed the entire trauma to them. Meanwhile, the respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner before the Kadampuliyur Police Station and an enquiry was conducted by the police officials. After the enquiry, the respondent was warned and sent away. The petitioner further alleged that thereafter, she sent a legal notice to the respondent for dissolution of

CMA No. 592 of 2021

marriage to which he did not reply. Later, she filed the petition for divorce under Section 12[1][c]2[1][a][i] of the Hindu Marriage Act, to dissolve the marriage registered on 03.07.2017.

The respondent admitted that the petitioner and he belonged to the same village and that the petitioner is a graduate in B.Tech [Engineering] from IFET Engineering College, Gangarampalayam. The respondent alleged that on 03.07.2017, the marriage between the petitioner and himself was registered before the Joint Sub Registrar, Cuddalore, and thereafter, the marriage as per the Hindu rites and customs was conducted at JSK Marriage Hall at Thiruvandhipuram. The respondent alleged that the marriage was a love marriage and the petitioner was the one who approached him to share his cellphone number and used to talk to him over phone regularly. The respondent contended that the petitioner, on completion of her education, got employment in the same College and thereafter, they decided to get married. Since the respondent was only a 10th pass, the petitioner's family did not agree for the marriage, but his family readily agreed. Later, the petitioner and the respondent got married and resided in the respondent's house. The respondent contended that he was a carpenter by profession and therefore, he had to go to other States due to his avocation. While so, after returning from Kerala on 05.08.2017, he came to know that on 03.08.2017, the petitioner's parents forcibly took her away from the matrimonial home and therefore, he

CMA No. 592 of 2021

lodged a complaint before the Kadampuliyur Police Station. The petitioner did not appear for the enquiry, but later filed the above petition for divorce. The respondent contended that he filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in HMOP.No.55/2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Panruti, and also filed Transfer OP.No.82/2018, for joint trial of the cases. The respondent prayed that since the Transfer OP petition was pending, the petition filed by the petitioner for divorce be dismissed.

Before, the Family Court, the HMOP.No.55/2017, filed by the respondent was renumbered as HMOP.No.27/2019, pursuant to the order dated 12.11.2018, of the learned District Judge, Cuddalore, in Transfer OP.No.82/2018. The Family Court, tried both the OPs together and passed a common order, allowing the petitioner's petition for divorce and rejecting the respondent's petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Family Court insofar as HMOP.No.80/2018, only is concerned, the respondent has filed the above Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Family Court erred in holding that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent in the Joint Sub Registrar Office, was a forced one. The learned counsel submitted that since no complaint was filed against the petitioner, the Court ought to have presumed that the marriage was solemnised with the consent of the parties. The learned counsel further

CMA No. 592 of 2021

submitted that the Family Court miserably failed to appreciate, both the oral and documentary evidence on record in proper perspective and therefore, the judgment and decree is vitiated and deserved to be set aside.

The learned counsel for the respondent/wife submitted that the Family Court has considered the evidence on record, both oral and documentary, in proper perspective and has returned a well considered judgment, and the same does not require any interference by this Court. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

We have heard the both the learned counsels and also perused the materials placed on record.

The undisputed fact is that the petitioner and the respondent belonged to the same village and that the petitioner is an Engineering graduate in B.Tech from IFET Engineering College, Gangarampalayam. It is also undisputed that the petitioner, after her education, obtained employment in the same college. While the petitioner claims that the marriage with the respondent was conducted under duress by threatening to kill her and her parents and other family members, the respondent contends that the marriage was a consensual one and that the petitioner and the respondent were in a romantic relationship even before the marriage. According to the petitioner, the respondent used to harass, tease and threaten her, on her way to and from College and that he had also warned her that nobody

CMA No. 592 of 2021

could stop him from marrying her. While so, on 03.07.2017, the respondent along with his henchmen, forcibly took her to the Sub Registrar's Office at Cuddalore, to register the marriage by threatening to kill her family members if she did not consent to the marriage. The petitioner alleged that due to the threat to her life and her family members and since the respondent and his men forced her, she went to the Sub Registrar Office. The petitioner further contended that she had never gone ent to JSK Marriage Hall, at Thiruvanthipuram and that Hindu marriage as per Hindu rites and customs was never solemnised. Since the marriage was forced one, the petitioner filed the petition under Section 12[1][c][2][1][a][i] of the Hindu Marriage Act, to declare the marriage as void.

The respondent on the other hand, denied the allegations of the petitioner by filing a counter to the petition filed by the petitioner. The respondent contended that the marriage was a consensual marriage and that the petitioner and the respondent were involved in a romantic relationship even before the marriage. The respondent further contended that the marriage was registered on 03.07.2017, before the Joint Sub Registrar, Cuddalore, and thereafter, the marriage according to Hindu rites and customs was solemnised in the presence of friends and relatives at JSK Marriage Hall, Thiruvanthipuram, Cuddalore. The respondent contended that even though the petitioner's parents initially objected for the

CMA No. 592 of 2021

marriage, on the ground that he was only a 10th pass, but later the consensual marriage was solemnised in a proper manner. The respondent further contended that as a carpenter, he used to travel to other States for his business purposes and likewise, he left for Kerala on 03.08.2017, and on his return from Kerala, on 05.08.2017, he came to know that the petitioner's parents had taken her away from the matrimonial home on 03.08.2017 and therefore, he lodged a complaint before the Kadampuliyur Police Station on 06.08.2017. The petitioner, instead of appearing before the Police Station for enquiry, filed the petition for divorce. The respondent contended that since the marriage was a consensual marriage, the petition seeking divorce deserved to be dismissed.

Before the Family Court, the petitioner examined herself as PW1 and two other persons as PWs.2 and 3 and marked four documents. The respondent examined himself as RW1 and marked six documents on his side in support of his case.

The Family Court, on an appreciation of the evidence on record and after framing necessary issues, found that the respondent had failed to prove that the marriage was consensual and therefore, allowed the petition filed by the petitioner by declaring the marriage as void.

We find that it is the specific case of the respondent that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was a consensual marriage and

CMA No. 592 of 2021

that the petitioner and the respondent were romantically involved from 2014. The respondent, to show that they were in love even before marriage, filed 10 photographs. The petitioner, while examined as PW1, admitted that she was there in the photographs, but she denied having taken any photograph along with the respondent. In view of the aforesaid evidence of PW1, the Family Court examined the photographs in detail and found that in the photographs, the petitioner appeared to be in a stressed state of mind. The Family Court reasoned that had the petitioner willingly taken the photographs, her demeanor would have been different. The Family Court finding that there was absolutely no whisper about the photographs, Ex.R1, in the counter filed by the respondent, rejected the same for want of pleadings. In support of his contention that the marriage was solemnised in JSK Marriage Hall, as per Hindu rites and customs, the respondent relied on Exs.R5 and R6 and the evidence of RW2 and RW3, who testified that they had attended the marriage in JSK Marriage Hall. The Family Court found it utterly strange and unbelievable that a marriage solemnised with such pomp and show was neither videographed nor photographs were taken at the time of the marriage. The Family court reasoned that had the marriage been conducted as per the Hindu rites and customs in the said Marriage Hall, that too, in the presence of friends and relatives, and if really RW2 and RW3 had witnessed the marriage, the respondent would have produced some photographs or the

CMA No. 592 of 2021

videograph of the ceremonies of the marriage. In the absence of any corroborative evidence, in support of RW2 and RW3’s presence in the marriage, the evidence of RW2 and RW3 was found unreliable and Exs.R5 and R6 as forged documents. The Family Court relying on Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, held that for a valid Hindu marriage, the marriage ought to have been solemnised as per the customary rites and ceremonies, including the Saptapadi. In the absence of any evidence to prove that the marriage was solemnised as per the Hindu customs and ceremonies and as required by Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Family Court found that the allegation of the respondent that there was a marriage solemnised as per Hindu rites and customs, remained unproved.

As rightly pointed out by the Family Court, Exs.R5 and R6, which are a copy of the marriage invitation and the receipt, are not sufficient to prove that the marriage as per Hindu rites and customs was solemnised. We find it very strange that though the marriage invitation and the marriage hall receipts are filed, either the video recording of the marriage which is very common these days or the photographs taken during the marriage, are not produced. These deficiencies raise a serious doubt about the veracity of the respondent's claim of a valid Hindu marriage and therefore, we find absolutely no compelling reasons to interfere with the well considered judgment of the Family Court.

CMA No. 592 of 2021

In view of the above discussions, we find no merit in the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal and accordingly, the same is dismissed and the judgment and decree of the Family Court dated 08.10.2020, made in HMOP.No.80/2018, is confirmed. No costs. (P.T.A.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 09-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AP To

1. The Judge, Family Court, Cuddalore.

2. The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court Chennai.

CMA No. 592 of 2021

P.T.ASHA J. AND N.MALA J. AP CMA No. 592 of 2021 AND CMP NO. 3626 OF 2021 09-09-2026