Supreme Court of India
Smt. Gurnam Kaur & Anr vs Puran Singh & Ors on 8 February, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1996 SCC (2) 567, JT 1996 (5) 664, AIRONLINE 1996 SC 28, (1996) 2 CIV LJ 113, (1996) 2 SCR 322, 1996 (2) SCC 567, (1996) 1 CUR CC 269, (1996) 1 HINDU LR 446, 1996 ALL CJ 775, (1996) MARRI LJ 220, (1996) 5 JT 664, (1996) 1 LJR 576, (1996) 1 ICC 560, 1996 (7) SCC 470, (1996) 1 CURCC 323, (1996) 2 LANDLR 185, (1996) REVDEC 407, 1996 (3) SCC 54, (1997) 1 BANKLJ 83, (1996) 3 ICC 20, 1996 ALL CJ 2 863(1), (1997) 2 RENCJ 347, (1996) 2 RENCR 351, (1996) 1 ICC 821, (1996) 2 CIVLJ 604, 1996 HRR 503, 1996 SCFBRC 13 345, 1996 UJ(SC) 657, (1996) 2 SCR 759 (SC), (1996) 2 IJR 637 (SC), (1996) 2 SCR 322 (SC), (1996) 5 JT 542 (SC), (2005) 2 MAH LJ 248, (2005) 4 BOM CR 879, (2006) 110 FACLR 653, (2006) 2 CURLR 124, (2006) 4 BOM CR 768, (2006) 4 MAH LJ 119
Author: K. Ramaswamy
Bench: K. Ramaswamy
PETITIONER: SMT. GURNAM KAUR & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: PURAN SINGH & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/02/1996 BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J) CITATION: 1996 SCC (2) 567 JT 1996 (5) 664 1996 SCALE (2)382 ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
O R D E R In this appeal, the only question is whether the appellant is a legitimate child of her father, Ram Singh. Though all the courts concurrently have found that she is the daughter of Ram Singh and her mother Gurnam Kaur, the finding recorded is that she is illegitimate child since the marriage of Gurnam Kaur with her previous husband was not legally dissolved. Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as amended by Amendment Act 68 of 1976 reads as under:
"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, whether such child is born before or. after the commencement of the marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted in respect of that marriage under this Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be valid otherwise than on a petition under the Act."
Preceding the amendment, declaration of nullity by a decree of a Court is a pre-condition. Amendment 68 of 1976 has done away with it and declared that notwithstanding the 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 whether such child is born before or after the commencement of the Amendment 68 of 1976 and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted in respect of that marriage under the Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise then on a petition under the Act. Thus it would be clear that declaration of validity of a marriage on a petition of either party or, in other words, declaration of the marriage as nullity under a decree which were preconditions under Section 12 of the Act is done away with. Consequentially, as if the marriage had been valid, the child shall be legitimate whether such child was born before or after the commencement of Act 68 of 1976. By operation of Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 read with Schedule I, appellant being the daughter of Ram Singh, is entitled to the property of her father. The decree is accordingly granted. Application for appointing a guardian of the minor is allowed.
The appeal is accordingly allowed.