Divya’s somersault that she will never again live with Ilavarasan has brought into sharp focus the status of their “marriage”. While announcing on the High Court premises on Wednesday that she was longer willing to be with Ilavarasan, a recording of which is available with Express, Divya began her statement by saying that she “married” him (Ilavarasan)” on her own liking.
However, advocate K Balu, belonging to the PMK and closely associated with the case, told Express that Divya’s statement on the marriage was a mere “slip of the tongue”.
“The marriage did not take place at all. So there is no question of what the next legal step is or what its status is. It is true she went to Ilavarasan’s house in the beginning. But now she wants to live with her mother,” he argues. Further, Balu contended that Ilavarasan had not attained the age of marriage according to law.
On the other hand, VCK member and lawyer M Palanimuthu said it was beyond doubt that the marriage had indeed taken place and the statement of the girl to the media has proved it. In his view, even if Ilavarasan had not attained the age of marriage, only a court of law could dissolve it and declare it null and void.
“If it is indeed true, then the girl’s side has to move the family court and file a petition seeking dissolution of the marriage on the basis of the boy’s age. Only the court can decide it. In case it is proved that the boy had indeed attained legal age at the time of marriage, then the only way is for filing a petition seeking divorce,” he points out.