A marriage between a Hindu woman and a Mahomedan is not valid under Mahomedan Law, and no rights of inheritance are created between the husband and wife by an irregular marriage.

1. The revision-petitioner Chellamma is alleged to be the wife of now deceased Parakal Ummar, who died on 9-8-1976 Ummar was employed in the Public Works Department. On 7-1-1973 they executed a marriage udampadi and they were living as husband and wife till the death of Ummar. They had no children. The respondents herein are the near relatives of deceased Ummar.

2. After the death of Ummar an application was filed by the petitioner for obtaining a succession certificate in respect of the assets left by deceased Ummar. The respondents contested the matter and according to them there was no valid marriage between the petitioner and deceased Ummar. They admitted the execution of marriage udampadi, but denied the existence of a valid marriage. The trial court found that there was only an irregular marriage, since under the Mahomedan Law a marriage between a Mahomedan and a Hindu woman was not permissible. The trial court held that the petitioner was entitled to 1/3 of the amount under the Provident Fund and gratuity as her name was nominated by the subscriber. The trial court construed the nomination as a gift. The appellate court concurred with the finding that the petitioner was not a legal representative of deceased Ummar. However, the court held that the nomination by the deceased subscriber would only confer a right to receive the amount and it did not operate as a gift. The revision petition is directed against the order passed by the appellate court.

3. The fact that deceased Ummar and the petitioner entered into a marriage agreement and they lived as husband and wife is not disputed. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the marriage between a Hindu woman and a Mahomedan is legal and whether the wife is entitled to inherit the property of the deceased husband. If only the marriage was legal, it could be held that the wife was a legal representative of the husband.

4. Under Mahomedan Law marriage has a definite legal meaning. It is a contract for the legalization of intercourse and the procreation of children. "Marriage is an institution ordained for the protection of society and in order that human beings may guard themselves from foulness and unchastity". (See Ameer Ali, 'Students' 7th Edn Page 97). The legal essentials of a valid Mahomedan Marriage are that there should be a proposal made by or on behalf of one of the parties to the marriage and an acceptance of the proposal by or on behalf of the other in the presence and hearing of two male or one male and two female witnesses, who must be sane and adult Mahomedan. The proposal and acceptance must both be expressed at one meeting. The presence of witnesses is essential to the validity of the marriage. Marriages under Mahommedan Law are of three kinds. First there are valid marriages, second there are marriages which are void (batil) and thirdly there are marriages which are fasid, a word which has been translated as vitiated. Like most other systems the Mahommedan Law discountenances a marriage between a Mahommedan male and a woman professing other religion. A Muslim cannot marry an idolatress or a fire-worshipper. As regards this the difference of school of law such as Shiiate or Hanafi is immaterial

5. The learned author Mulla in his Principles of Mahomedan Law. 18th Edn. at page 287 has stated:

"A Mahomedan male may contract a valid marriage not only with a Mahomedan woman, but also with a Kitabia, that is, a Jewess or a Christian, but not with an idolatress or a fire-worshipper A marriage, however, with an idolatress or a fire-worshipper, is not void, but merely irregular."

Professor A. A A Fyzee is of opinion that a marriage between a Hindu woman and a Mahomedan is void.

"The present position appears to be that the nikah of a Muslim man with an idolater or fire-worshipper is irregular and not void. Mulla goes to say, however, that the marriage of a Muslim woman with a non-Muslim is only irregular, not void This is, it is submitted, an in