Madras High Court directs trial court to hear non-religious couple’s plea to void marriage

“In the case in hand, two individuals decided not to identify themselves with any religion and wanted to marry and register the same under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriage Act, 2009 and this marriage unfortunately fell apart resulting in the petitioner filing a suit seeking for declaration to declare the marriage as null and void. The agony of the petitioner seems to continue since the Court below is refusing to entertain the suit,” Justice Venkatesh observed on September 24.

Woman approached HC earlier

The case had already gone through one round before the high court. The woman initially filed her suit before the district munsif court. It was returned through an order dated July 21, 2025. She challenged that decision before the high court.

On December 4, 2025, the high court directed the trial court to give her an opportunity to be heard in open court and then pass an appropriate order on the merits.

Justice N Anand Venkatesh said the issue was covered by an earlier division bench ruling.

The woman then returned to the trial court. But on April 29, the court returned the matter again, stating this time that it had no jurisdiction because the marriage had not taken place under the Hindu Marriage Act. She then filed the present revision petition before the high court.

Marriages outside religion-specific laws

Justice Venkatesh said the issue was covered by an earlier division bench ruling involving a marriage between persons who had not indicated their religion, and it did not fall within the Hindu Marriage Act, Special Marriage Act or the other religion-specific laws referred to by the court. The division bench verdict in that matter held a party could seek a declaration concerning the marriage by invoking the jurisdiction of the family court.

The high court noted that the Family Courts Act does not specify that only persons belonging to a particular religion can invoke its provisions. It referred to the earlier ruling’s observation that the law provides a forum for matrimonial disputes, including disputes concerning marital status, for persons who cannot invoke the other marriage laws.

What Supreme Court said

The court also referred to a Supreme Court ruling concerning matrimonial status. The Supreme Court had held that a suit or proceeding seeking a declaration regarding the validity of a marriage or matrimonial status falls within the jurisdiction of the family court. It also observed that it makes no difference whether the relief sought is an affirmative declaration or a negative one.

Taking note of this legal position, the Madras High Court held that the woman’s plaint should be taken on file rather than being returned on the ground that the marriage had not taken place according to Hindu rites and customs.

Refusing to declare the woman’s marriage null and void, the high court dealt with whether her plaint could be returned at the threshold. It set aside the April 29 docket order and directed the district munsiff court, to take the plaint on file, number it and proceed further in accordance with law.

The registry was directed to return the original plaint to the woman so that she could represent it before the trial court and pursue her remedy. The court directed that the plaint be represented on or before October 12.

The revision petition was allowed on those terms, with no order as to costs. The immediate effect is that the woman’s claim will now be considered through the legal process instead of being stopped at the filing stage just because the marriage did not fall under the Hindu Marriage Act.