The fact that a tremendous amount of issues have erupted in India over the past couple of months is something that can not be denied. Ranging from politics to social and religious to entertainment, major shifts and modulations have been witnessed. The SC has been under much toil lately.
On recent news, the SC has come out with a statement that a simple registration of an agreement of marriage would not be sufficient to establish the legitimacy of the marriage.
This decision will be ruled under Justice Bobde. Talking about him, soon after serving as the apex court judge for almost eight years, Justice Bobde will now serve as the 47th CJI that will last up to April 23, 2021. Justice Bobde was also one of those who played a fundamental role in the Ayodha land verdict of 2019.
The entire issue started after Sujathamma, the maternal granddaughter of Sonnappa claimed to have married her maternal uncle, Hanumanthappa, the son of Sonnapa. According to the apex court, no wedding ceremonies in accordance with Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, were performed.
The SC has further announced that the couple when married was still under-age and hence their marriage would be considered void. However, the plaintiff exclaims that the marriage was legitimate in all its terms.
It wasn’t after much hassle that the SC has finally agreed to the claim of her marriage’s legitimacy. However, it denied any share in the properties to the plaintiff. This was also done after Sujathamma failed to prove the legitimacy of the marriage by customary ceremonies or rites. The apex court justified this by stating that only the act of bringing witnesses to testify would not be sufficed for her to hold a claim to all the possessions.
Not only this, but the SC also asserted that the marriage is not authorized since the marriage certificate under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 fails to act as proof. It further stated that it was merely a “contract for the marriage that happened to be registered.”
It also stated: “Due to the inability to prove the solemnization of the marriage by customary ceremonies or rites, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiff any claim in the property. It justified its move stating that the mere act of bringing witnesses to testify for her, does not give the plaintiff any legal right to claim share.”