Out-of-court dissolution of marriage not valid

Any dissolution or annulment of marriage is only through a court of law and any agreement or understanding or proceeding outside the court has no legal sanctity.

HYDERABAD: Any dissolution or annulment of marriage is only through a court of law and any agreement or understanding or proceeding outside the court has no legal sanctity. However, a child born to them is entitled to claim maintenance. As per Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, even a child of void marriage is legitimate for all purposes, including for purpose of succession, entitlement of maintenance and so on.

In one of the cases, a woman married one Srinivas in 1999 and in their valid wedlock they were blessed with a male child. After some years, differences arose between them and even the efforts of elders for a patch-up became futile. They then started living separately A so-called document was executed between the woman and the man in 2005 claiming there was no valid marriage between them. However, if there is anything in subsistence, it is dissolving by the memorandum of understanding (MoU).

Meanwhile, another man (Ramu) came into the woman’s life, developed intimacy with her and lured her to marry him, and there was a marriage between them in 2004. They were blessed with a female child out of the so-called wedlock. After a few years differences arose with her ‘second husband’  too and she moved the family court, claiming Rs 25,000 per month to herself and the minor daughter towards maintenance. The family court awarded Rs 3,500 per month to her and Rs 5,000 to the child. Aggrieved by the same, the so-called husband approached the High Court with a revision petition.

Justice B Siva Sankara Rao noticed that there was a marriage between her (respondent) and Ramu (revision petitioner). By virtue of the marriage, though void, because of her marital tie with Srinivas earlier, admittedly in subsistence for not dissolved even from the MoU made in 2005, the child is entitled to claim maintenance, but not by herself as self-inflicted hardship cannot be taken advantage of by any person.

Marriage to Srinivas by her was validly performed in 1999 and from the MoU made in 2005 outside the court there was no valid dissolution of the said marital tie. Once there was no legal dissolution of the marital tie between the two, even any ceremony of marriage to another man (Ramu) took place, that did not give sanctity, the judge observed. While allowing the revision petition partly, the judge has set aside the lower court’s award of maintenance of Rs 3,500 per month to the woman. So far as the child maintenance is concerned, the judge upheld the order of awarding Rs 5,000 per month to the child.

Related Stories

No stories found.
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com