Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Supreme Court Bars Post-Divorce Maintenance Claims When Wife Voluntarily Waived Maintenance In Settlement Agreement Advocate Is An Officer Of Court, Not Mere Agent Of Client: Allahabad High Court Distinguishes Between Active Concealment & Statement In Ignorance, Slaps Cost On Litigants For Misleading Bench Cannot Summon Accused Mechanically On Protest Petition Without Assigning Justifiable Reasons: Andhra Pradesh High Court Increment Not A Bounty: Allahabad High Court Rules Public Holiday Cannot Delay Pay Hike For Teachers Joining Next Working Day Paying Taxes Or Utility Connections Confer No Legal Ownership Over Govt Land': Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Demolition Of Encroachment 'Cannot Compel Public Authority To Collect Data From Private Bodies': Bombay High Court Quashes CIC Orders Directing SEBI To Procure BSE Records Under RTI Act Section 10 CPC Cannot Stay Previously Instituted Title Suit Pending Subsequent Probate Case; Inherent Powers Under Section 151 Inapplicable When Probate Dismissed: Calcutta High Court Mere Phone Calls Without Transcripts No Ground For Murder Conspiracy: Delhi High Court Clear Violation Of Section 42 NDPS Act': Gujarat High Court Holds Failure To Record Secret Info In Writing Fatal When Police Officer Had Time To Act JK High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Cop Accused Of Threatening Advocate Over Phone Call Without Prior Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC Custody Unwarranted For Mere Formalities Once Weapon Is Recovered: Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail In BNS Axe Attack Case Circumstances Of Crime Can Be Assessed During Trial: High Court Upholds Trial Of Minor As Adult Under JJ Act In Murder Case Statutory Deposit Under Order 21 Rule 89 CPC Is A Sine Qua Non; Litigant Cannot Stall Auction Sale By Merely Blaming Counsel: Madras High Court

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Share in Ancestral Property for Children of Void or Voidable Marriages

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set a precedent by upholding the rights of children born from void or voidable marriages to their ancestral property. The Civil Appeal No. of 2024, involving the appellants Raja Gounder and others against respondents M. Sengodan and others, was resolved with a detailed analysis of family relations and rights under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

The dispute centered on the partition and possession of agricultural lands in Tamil Nadu, following the demise of Muthusamy Gounder. The appellants, later added to the case, claimed their share as legal heirs, despite the disputed legitimacy of their parentage. The initial suit, filed by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2, was dismissed by both the Trial Court and the High Court due to the non-establishment of valid marriages of Muthusamy Gounder with Appellant No. 2 and Respondent No. 2.

In a significant observation, the Supreme Court, led by Justices M.M. Sundresh and S.V.N. Bhatti, noted, “Denying the children of Muthusamy Gounder a share in the property of notional partitioned in favour of Muthusamy Gounder, is unsustainable in law and fact.” This statement underlines the Court’s recognition of the rights of children irrespective of the legal status of their parents' marriage.

The Court’s analysis leaned heavily on Sections 17 and 18 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, regarding admissions and declarations in documented evidence. Key to the decision was a mortgage deed executed by Muthusamy Gounder, which acknowledged the appellants and Respondent No. 1 as his sons. This admission was deemed legally binding.

The judgement also references the case of Revanasiddappa and another v. Mallikarjun and others, reinforcing the principle that children from void or voidable marriages are entitled to shares in their parents' property. “The property of the parent, where the parent had an interest in the property of a joint Hindu family governed under the Mitakshara law, has to be ascertained,” the Court added, emphasizing the legal rights of all children to parental property.

The final verdict was the issuance of a preliminary decree of partition, dividing the property first between Respondent No. 3 and Muthusamy Gounder and then among his children, thus allowing the appeal. This ruling is a significant step in ensuring equal rights and justice for children born under all circumstances.

Date of Decision: 19th January 2024

RAJA GOUNDER AND OTHERS VS M. SENGODAN AND OTHERS

 

Latest Legal News