Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Per contra, learned State Public Prosecutor who appeared for learned High Court Government Pleader in the matter in his argument submitted that, merely because the KMRM Act has come into force, it has not repealed or overtaken the provisions of registration of marriages under H.M.Act, however, they run parallelly. While drawing the attention of this Court to Section 8 of KMRM Act, learned State Public Prosecutor further submitted that, as provided under the said Act, merely because a marriage is not registered under KMRM Act, the marriage does not become invalid. Submitting that neither there is any express repeal nor there is any implied repeal provisions pertaining to registration of marriages under H.M.Act by the Enactment of the KMRM Act, learned State Public Prosecutor also relied upon a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust -vs- Magnum Developers and others and connected matters, reported in AIR 2016 SC 381.

" 30 : It is well settled that in case where there is a repealing clause to a particular Act, it is a case of express repeal, but in a case where doctrine of implied repeal is to be applied, the matter will have to be determined by taking into account the exact meaning and scope of the words used in the repealing clause. It is equally well settled that the implied repeal is not readily inferred and the mere provision of an additional remedy by a new Act does not take away an existing remedy. While applying the principle of implied repeal, one has to see whether apparently inconsistent provisions have been repealed and reenacted.

31: The implied repeal of an earlier law can be inferred only where there is enactment of a later law which had the power to override the earlier law and is totally inconsistent with the earlier law and the two laws cannot stand together. If the later law is not capable of taking the place of the earlier law, and for some reason cannot be implemented, the earlier law would continue to operate. To such a case, the rule of implied repeal may result in a vacuum which the law making authority may not have intended."

The above observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court makes it very clear that the implied repeal cannot be readily inferred and mere provision of an additional remedy by a new Act would not take away an existing remedy. Further the implied repeal of an earlier law can be inferred only where there is enactment of a later law which had the power to override the earlier law and is totally inconsistent with the earlier law and the two laws cannot stand together. The registration of marriages under H.M.Act and under the RHMK Rules, not just provides a provision for registration of only those marriages which have been contracted in the Karnataka State, but, it also provides for registration of marriages in such place in which the bridegroom or the bride ordinarily resides. This is clear in Rule 4(1) of RHMK Rules, whereas, Section 3 of KMRM Act confines the scope of said Act only with respect to the marriages contracted in the State on or after the appointed day. However, the said KMRM Act does not confine the registration of marriages only for Hindu marriages, but, it says that it is applicable to every marriage that are contracted in the State.