Divorce registration at sub-registrar office is valid or not?

247 votes

In New Delhi, divorce cannot be registered at the Sub-Registrar's Office, as divorce is a judicial matter, not an administrative one. The legal process for divorce must be initiated by filing a petition in the appropriate court, such as a Family Court or District Court.

The Sub-Registrar's Office is responsible for property and document registrations and does not have the authority to grant or register divorces. Therefore, a divorce deed registered with a Sub-Registrar is not legally valid on its own.

A registered divorce deed, while it may serve as a record of mutual agreement between parties, does not constitute a legal dissolution of marriage. For a divorce to be legally binding in India, it must be granted through a court decree issued by a competent court.

LawRato LawRato

811 votes

Registraration at sub registrar office the divorce is legal. Genuine and valid as per law and Hindu rites. But any of you covered in the sun cast of Brahman; Vania; lohana or upar leval cast then the decree for divorce is compulsory.

Advocate Hitesh D Katharotiya LawRato

718 votes

Dear client if u want to be 100% sure that no issues crop up in future regarding your divorce it is always advisable that you file a petition for mutual consent divorce in court and get it ur marriage dissolved. Don't go for any other kind of customary divorce as it may create issues in future and even the legally these kind customary divorce are not always considered valid.

LawRato LawRato

623 votes

Hi, You will have to file application in family Court u/s 13B HMA Divorce by mutual consent. — (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976)*, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved. (2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in the meantime, the court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnised and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.] (i) The period of 6 to 18 months provided in section 13B is a period of interregnum which is intended to give time and opportunity to the parties to reflect on their move. In this transitional period the parties or either of them may have second thoughts; Suman v. Surendra Kumar, AIR 2003 Raj 155. (ii) The period of living separately for one year must be immediately preceding the presentation of petition. The expression ‘living separately' connotes not living like husband and wife. It has no reference to the place of living. The parties may live under the same roof and yet they may not be living as husband and wife. The parties should have no desire to perform marital obligations; Sureshta Devi v. Om Prakash, AIR 1992 SC 1904. (iii) The period of six to eighteen months time is given in divorce by mutual consent as to give time and opportunity to the parties to reflect on their move and seek advice from relations and friends. Mutual consent should continue till the divorce decree is passed. The court should be satisfied about the bona fides and consent of the parties. If there is no consent at the time of enquiry the court gets no jurisdiction to make a decree for divorce. If the court is held to have the power to make a decree solely based on the initial petition, it negates the whole idea of mutuality. There can be unilateral withdrawal of consent. Held, that since consent of the wife was obtained by fraud and wife was not willing to consent, there could be unilateral withdrawal, of consent; Thanks

Advocate Ramit Sehrawat LawRato