Get 20% off StudyMode
Page 1 of 13

Summary Gulliver's Travels Iii

Continues for 12 more pages »
Read full document

Summary Gulliver's Travels Iii

Page 1 of 13
chools and Sources of Hindu Law

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Applicability of Legislation (S2) - Who is a Hindu?
Section 2. Application of Act :-  
(1) This act applies
a. to any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthna or Arya Samaj b. to any person who is a Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion and c. to any other person domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion, unless it is proved that any such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealth with herein if this Act had not been passed Explanation: the following people are Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs by religion as the case may be:- (a) any child, legitimate or illegitimate

Concepts and Forms of Marriage
Conditions for validity of marriage(sec 3 & 5)
Solemnization of Marriage S7
Registration of Marriage S8
V‎oid and Voidable Marriage S11 & S12

1. Surajmani Stella Kujur v Durga Charan Hansdah, 2001
husb - 2nd marriage - 1st wife sues for bigamy under S494 IPC - conceded by appellant that marriage out of HMA in light of S2(2) of the act(Schd Tribe) - appellant relied on alleged custom in tribe which mandates monogamy as a rule - could not prove the same - burden on proof on one who is alleging the custom - court observed S29(2) HMA recognizes importance of customs - to prove that the custom is ancient, certain and reasonable - no proof of alleged custom making the 2nd marriage void - hence no offence under bigamy S494 IPC

2. S. Nagalingam v Sivagami, 2001
appellant-accused second marriage - while 1st marriage still subsisting - 2nd marriage performed under S7A, HMA. - Appellant took plea that the second marriage solemnized without saptapadi therefore not guilty under bigamy - SC held appellant guilty of bigamy - saptapadi is...