Last Will may prevail over earlier Will:-

-
  Last Will may prevail over earlier Will:- In case of dispute between earlier and subsequent parts of a Will,the subsequent part of the Will will prevails ( Kaivelikkal Ambunhi & ors vs H.Ganesh Bhandary,(1995) 5 SCC-444 & Uma Devi Nambiar & ors vs TC Sidhan,( 2004) 2 SCC-321. In case of “ Jasbir Singh vs Jaspal Singh & ors ”,2016 SCC Online P & H-3416,it   was held that the last will would prevail and the previous Will automatically deemed to have been cancelled, even in the absence of any specific clause.
Post a Comment

Divorce in India : A Study-2 :-

-

 

 

Divorce in India : A Study :-

 

Nowadays, Court has become a Heritage Park. I mentioned it because when the Magistrate of Court ask the spouse, “When did you see/meet your spouse last?” In maximum cases, spouse says. “In the Court”. This is the situation in our 4G age, anyway. It is very difficult to make “relation” even it needs lifetime but it can be broken at any time, even within a second it can be broken.



                                                          


The Rig Veda pronounces some impressive texts: After completing the seventh step(Saptapadi) the bridgegroom said: “With seven steps we have become friends(sakha).May I attain to friendship with thee;may I not be separated from thy friendship’.Shatapatha Bramana speaks of the wife as the half of one’s self-Ardho ha va esha atmano.

 

Apastamba has stated that from time of marriage the husband and wife were united in religious ceremonies and likewise in rewards for acts of spiritual merit-Panigrahanaddhi sahatvan karmasu,tatha punyafaleshucha.




 

Marriage is necessarily the basis of social organization and the foundation of important legal rights and obligations. The importance and imperative character of the institution of marriage needs no comment. In Hindu law, marriage is treated as a samskara or a sacrament. It is the last of the 10 sacraments, enjoined by the Hindu religion for regeneration of men and obligatory in case of every Hindu who does not desire to adopt the life of a sanyasi.

 

The protagonists of the Hindu law reform, in matters of marriage, were on strong ground when they assailed the law as it stood. Alternative conditions had arisen in matters-social, economic and political. There was no justification for permitting plurality of wives and the time had certainly come for enforcing monogamy by law. According to the early Hindu society, monogamy was the approved rule. Polygamy was an exceptional provision and taking of more than one wife required legal justification. The weight of evidence, adduced before the Hindu Law Committee, was preponderantly in favor of monogamy as a rule of law.


 

Divorce, however, is a thorny question. Hindu law, strictly so called, did not allow divorce except in certain communities, in the lower social strata, where it was permitted by custom; and there was deep-rooted sentiment against any provision for divorce in the new legislation which was being forged. While marriage for life is the most natural form of marriage and best adapted to a civilized society, there can be little justification for legally insisting upon the union as indissoluble, under circumstances of exceptional hardship or cases of exceptional depravity on the part of one of the spouses. Considerable evidence was adduced before the Hindu Law Committee that there were thousands of cases of desertion of women by their husbands and many cases were brought to its notice in which remarriage had been desired and was possible but could not be effected by reason of the existing law against divorce. Grounds other than desertion also required serious consideration and the committee made a strong report in favour of the proposed legislation providing for relief by way of divorce in appropriate cases. The recommendations in the report of the Rau Committee on the questions of marriage and divorce were substantially accepted by Parliament. The Hindu Marriage Act came into force on 18 May, 1955.It amends and codifies the law relating to marriage among Hindus.(Mulla, Hindu Law,21st Edition).

 

Marriage is an institution of great social relevance and with social changes; this institution has also changed correspondingly. However, the institution of marriage is subject to human frailty and error. Marriage is certainly not a mere “reciprocal possession” of the sexual organs as was philosophized by Immanuel Kant nor can it be romanticized as a relationship which Tennyson fancied as “made in Heaven”.

 

           In many cases, marriages simply fail for no fault of the parties but as a result of discord and disharmony between them. In such situations, putting an end to this relationship is the only way out of this social bondage. But unfortunately, initially the marriage laws in every country were “fault oriented”. Under such laws marriage can be dissolved only by a court’s decree within certain limited grounds which are to be proved in adversarial proceedings. Such fault-oriented divorce laws have been criticized as obsolete, unrealistic, discriminatory and sometimes immoral.(Smruti Pahariya vs.Sanjay Pahariya(2009) 13 SCC-338).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Applicability of CPC & Limitation Act in Writ Proceedings:-

-
  Applicability of CPC & Limitation Act in Writ Proceedings:-   The issue concerning applicability of the provisions of the CPC in the writ proceedings is no longer res integra in view clear pronouncement made by the Supreme Court in “ Puran Singh and Others v State of Punjab and Others” reported in (1996) 2 SCC-205 , wherein the Supreme Court was dealing with an issue as to whether the provisions contained under Order 22 of the CPC are applicable to proceedings under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. The question as to whether provisions of the Act, 1963 would apply in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is also no longer res integra in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in “Smt. Sudama Devi v Commissioner and others ” reported in (1983) 2 SCC-1.  
Read more

Guarantor has the liability to pay the loan amount taken by the principal debotor:-

-
  Guarantor has the liability to pay the loan amount taken by the principal debotor:- Recovery of debt from guarantor-Held, guarantee being a continuing guarantee,so long as the principal debt remained due and payable,the guarantor also remained liable-The suit was therefore not barred by limitation-However,liability of guarantor cannot exceed that of the principal debtor,even thought he guarantee documents mentioned so,since guarantor is only guaranteeing debt due by the principal debtor-Principal debtor being liable to pay interest 13.5% in respect of term loan facility   and 14% p.a. in respect of cash credit facility (B.G.Vasantha vs Corporation Bank<amangalore & anr,(2005) 10 SCC-215.                            Liability of guarantor is co-extensive with that of principal debtor unless it is explicitly exluded by the contract-Further held,...
Read more

Inheritance and Survivorship:-

-
  Inheritance and Survivorship:-                         ‘Mulla’ in his book Hindu Law (22nd Edition), while discussing the law prior to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 says that there are two systems of inheritance amongst the Hindus in India, namely, Mitakshara system and Dayabhaga system. The Dayabhaga system prevails in Bengal, while the Mitakshara system is applicable to other parts of India. The difference between the two systems arises from the fact that, while the doctrine of religious efficacy is the guiding principle under Dayabhaga School, there is no such definite guiding principle under the Mitakshara School. Sometimes consanguinity, and at the other times, religious efficacy has been regarded as the guiding principle. According to ‘Mulla’, Mitakshara recognises two modes of devolution of property, namely, survivorship and succession. The rules of survivo...
Read more