9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the second marriage under the Marumakkattayam Law. 2. Legitimacy of children born from the second marriage under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 3. Constitutionality of Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the context of Article 14 of the Constitution. Summary: 1. Validity of the Second Marriage: The litigation centered around the inheritance rights of children from the second marriage of P.K.K. Raman Nair. The trial court found the second marriage invalid as it occurred while the first wife was alive, thus disqualifying the children from the second marriage from inheriting any property. This decision was upheld by the High Court with minor modifications. The Supreme Court reiterated that under the Marumakkattayam Law, as modified by the Madras Marumakkattayam Act, 1932, any marriage contracted during the continuance of a prior valid marriage was void. Despite the repeal of this Act by the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975, the second marriage remained void because the repeal did not retroactively validate previously void marriages. 2. Legitimacy of Children Under Section 16: The appellants contended that under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, children from the second marriage should be considered legitimate and entitled to inheritance. Section 16(1) states, "Notwithstanding that a marriage is null and void under section 11, any child of such marriage who would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid, shall be legitimate." The Court held that the amended Section 16, which applies retrospectively, confers legitimacy on children from void marriages, allowing them to inherit their parents' property. Consequently, appellants 2 to 6, being children from the second marriage, were deemed legitimate for inheritance purposes. 3. Constitutionality of Section 16: The respondents argued that Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, discriminates between children born of void marriages before and after the Act, violating Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court examined the legislative intent and found that the amendment to Section 16 aimed to eliminate discrimination by legitimizing all children born of void marriages, irrespective of when the marriage occurred. The Court concluded that the amended Section 16 is constitutionally valid as it does not create unjustifiable distinctions between similarly situated illegitimate children. Conclusion: The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, dismissing the respondents' suits for exclusive possession and partition. It decreed the appellants' suit for partition, recognizing the legitimacy of children from the second marriage under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and their right to inherit their father's property. The trial court was directed to proceed with the partition suit accordingly.
|
