Back
Madras High Court
MOHAN
Nevilee P.Mehta - Appellant
Versus
Dolly Mehta - Respondent
Decided On : 08/14/1974
Marriage - Letters of Administration - Special Marriage Act, 1954, Section 4(a), Section 24(1)(i), Indian Succession Act, 1925, Section 295 - The court discussed the validity of the marriage between the deceased and the defendant, the effect of a decree nisi, and the power of the court to declare a marriage null and void under the Special Marriage Act. The court also considered the right to question the validity of the marriage and the necessity of obtaining a declaration of nullity before seeking Letters of Administration. The court held that the marriage was invalid for the purpose of testamentary proceedings and that the defendant was not a heir to the estate of the deceased.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff sought Letters of Administration for the estate of his deceased father, while the defendant, the deceased's widow, contested the validity of the marriage and her right to claim the assets.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the marriage between the deceased and the defendant was invalid for the purpose of testamentary proceedings, and the defendant was not a heir to the estate of the deceased.
Issues: The issues included the validity of the marriage, the plaintiff's right to question the marriage, the defendant's status as a heir, and the reliefs entitled to the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the marriage was invalid for the purpose of testamentary proceedings and that the defendant was not a heir to the estate of the deceased.
Final Decision: The plaintiff was entitled to succeed and was issued Letters of Administration for the estate of the deceased, while the defendant was denied the status of a wife.
ORDER:- Suit is for issue of letters of administration. The plaintiff herein filed O. P. No. 173 of 1972 for the issue of Letters of Administration in regard to the estate of his father Pheroze Mehta, who died intestate. As the son of the deceased, the plaintiff would be entitled to claim the entire estate, the assets of which would not exceed in the aggregate the sum of Rs. 88,581.06 and the net amount of the assets after deducting all items allowable under law would be Rs. 76,981.06. Undertaking to duly administer the property and credits of the said
Pheroze Mehta, the prayer for Letters of Administration was made.
2. The wife of the said Pheroze Mehta entered caveat, whereupon the said original petition was converted into a Testamentary Original Suit. In the written statement she contends that the late Pheroze Mehta died leaving behind not only the plaintiff, his son, but also the defendant, his widow, who was lawfully married to him at New Delhi on 16th April 1963. They lived as husband and wife to the knowledge of the plaintiff, who was well aware of the said marriage and treated the defendant as his step-mother. It is therefore contended that the plaintiff could not repudiate the status of the defendant and was estopped from doing so. The defendant submits that the plaintiff has wilfully suppressed many facts in a desperate attempt to walk away with the entire estate left by her late husband, that her marriage with her late husband is a valid one and that as a widow she is entitled to claim his assets, along with the step-son, the plaintiff. The defendant also submits that the plaintiff who is a third party to the marriage cannot pray for the nullity of the marriage in these testamentary proceedings.
3. The plaintiff filed a reply statement to the effect that the marriage of the defendant with his deceased father on 16th April 1963 was unlawful, since the defendant's marriage with her former husband one Mr. Concessio was dissolved by this Court in O. M. S. No. 13 of 1961 by a decree absolute on 1st May 1963. The marriage of the defendant with his deceased father having taken place on 16th April 1963 before her former marriage was dissolved, it would be null and void.
4. On these pleadings, the following issues were set for trial.
1. Can the validity of marriage between the deceased Pheroze Mehta and the defendant be questioned by plaintiff in this suit?
2. Is the marriage between the defendant and the deceased Pheroze Mehta invalid?
3. Is the plaintiff estopped from questioning the marriage?
4. Is the defendant a heir to the estate of the deceased Pheroze Mehta? If so, what is her share?
5. To what reliefs are the parties entitled to?
5. No oral evidence has been let in and the parties were content with marking of documents. On the side of the plaintiff, Exs. P-1 and P-2 were marked, while on the side of the defendant, Exs. D-1 to D-10 were marked.
6. Issues 1 to 3 : These issues may be clubbed together for the sake of convenience. It is contended for the plaintiff that he alone is entitled to the Letters of Administration to the exclusion of the defendant, since the former marriage of the defendant with Mr. Concessio was dissolved in O. M. S. No. 13 of 1961 by a decree nisi dated 18-10-1962 (Vide Ex. P-1) and the decree absolute was passed on 1st May 1963 (Vide Ex. P-2). Under law, therefore, the marriage of the defendant with Pheroze Mehta, having taken place on 16-4-1963, the period of wait would be six months and in so far as the marriage of the defendant with Pheroze Mehta had taken place even before the decree absolute, it was null and void. In this connection Mr. S. Sampath Kumar, the learned counsel for the plaintiff, relies on the decision in Sunanda v. Venkata Subba Rao, (1956) 2 Andh WR 853 : (AIR 1957 Andh Pra 424) as to what is the effect of a decree nisi. In that case, it has been held that a decree nisi is only a conditional decree and it does not change the status of the parties and that the parties continu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
