Supreme Court Grants Legitimate Rights to Children Born from Void Marriages in Ancestral Property Dispute

SUPREME COURT LAW INSIDER

LI Network

Published on: January 20, 2024 at 21:24 IST

Children born from void marriages cannot be denied a share in their parent’s property, ruled the Supreme Court.

Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti, in their decision, emphasized that offspring arising from void and voidable marriages should be treated as legitimate children and considered part of the extended family of the common ancestor.

The ruling overturned the High Court’s findings, emphasizing that these children are entitled to an equal share in the ancestral property alongside those born from valid marriages.

The case involved Muthusamy Gounder, who had three marriages, two of which were declared void. Gounder, the common ancestor, had five children – four sons and one daughter – from these marriages.

The legitimate son, the third respondent, filed a partition suit in the trial court, which was decreed in his favor. However, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the children born from void marriages.

The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether children born from void marriages have the right to a share in the property of a common ancestor.

The Court, in its observation, highlighted that the admission of the common ancestor acknowledging the children born from void marriages as legitimate would serve as evidence in favor of those children.

Citing the Privy Council’s decision in Gopal Das and another v. Sri Thakurji and others, the court noted that a statement made by a person is evidence not only against that person but also against those claiming through him.

By applying Sections 17 and 18 of the Indian Evidence Act, the Court concluded that the common ancestor’s admission, supported by documentary evidence, established the legitimacy of the children born from void marriages.

The Court affirmed the rights of these children in the ancestral property, emphasizing that denial of their share is legally and factually unsustainable.

Referring to the precedent in Revanasiddappa and another v. Mallikarjun and others, the Supreme Court maintained that children born from void or voidable marriages have rights in their parent’s property, including ancestral property.

Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the judgments of the lower courts and allowed the appeal by passing a preliminary decree of partition.

The decree allotted equal shares to the children born from void marriages in the notionally partitioned share of Muthusamy Gounder’s property.

The ruling clarifies the entitlement of children born from void and voidable marriages to a rightful share in their parent’s property.

Related Post