LexA. L. V. R. S. T. VEERAPPA CHETTIAR versus S. MICHAEL ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
1962 244 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1963} SUPP. A. L. V. R. S. T. VEERAPPA CHETTIAR "· S. MICHAEL ETC. (S. J. IMAlf, K. SuBBA RAo and N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, JJ.) Hindu Lmo-A ... ,.. marriagt-ful of-Difference bolwa11 A...,.. alld BmAma marriage-Pruumplion that tlitf'y Hindu marriage i.! ;,. BraAma form-Objector must prove tAt conlmry- Effect of bridegroom beari•g e:<pe•1ea of marriagt-Kanyadan. The main question involved in both the appeals was whether the marriage of Bangaru Ammal was in Arura form or in Brahma fonn. The contention of the appellant wa• that it was not in Asura fonn. Except a bare allegation in the plaint that the said marriage Wall held in Asura fonn, the plaintiffs did not give any particulars or set up any custom in the community to which the parties to the marriage bel~nged. They bad given evidence that a sum of Rs. 1,000 Wall paid all 'parisam' to the father of bride but that evidence had been rejected by both the courts. Respondents pointed out to the giving of Kambu by bridegroom's party to the bride's party at the time of betrothal and expenditure of R•. 300/· by bride- groom's party in connection with the marria~e of Bangaru Ammal and maintained that it was Asura marriage. HeUJ, that the marriage of Bangaru /\mmal wa• not in Asura fonn but in Brahm~ form. There was nothing to show that there was a practice in the family to give Kambu as •parisam' for the bride or Kam bu Wall paid as 'parisam' at the time of the betrothal ceremony in connection with the marriage of Bangaru Ammal. The father of the bride had spent large amounts and the bridegroom's party had spent only about Rs. 300/- in connection with the said marriage. The ex- penditure incurred by the bridegroom's party was not and could not have been the consideration for the father giving his daughter in marriage. There is a presumption in Hindu Law that every Hindu marriage is in Brahma form and that pre- sumption ball not been rebutted in this case. The court was entitled to presume that the necessary ceremony of Kanyadan must have been performed. As no consideration passed from the bridegroom to the father of the bride, the father must be held to have made a gift of the girl to the b ridcgroom. , 2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS The essence of the· Asura marriage is the sale of a bride for a price and it is one of the unapproved forms of marriage prohibited by Manu for all the four castes of Hindu society. The vice of the said marriage lies in the receipt of the price by the bride's father or other persons entitled to give away the bride as a consideration for the bride. Uthe amount paid or the ornament given is not the consideration foc taking the bride but only given to the bride or even to the bride's father out of affection or in token of respect to them or to comply with a traditional or ritualistic form, such payment cl_ocs not make the marriage an Asura marriage. There is also nothing in the texts to indicate that the bearing of the e>.penditure wholly or in part by the bridegroom or his parents is a 'con- dition or a criterion of such a marriage, for in such a case the bride's father or others entitled to give her in =rriagc do not take any consideration for the marriage, or in any way be~t thereunder. The fact that the bridegroom's party bcars·the expenditure may be due to varied circumstances. Prestige, vanity, social custom, the poverty or the disinclination of the bride's father or some of them may be the reasons for the in- curring of expenditure by bridegioom's father on the marriage but the money so spent is not the price or consideration for the bride. Even in a case where the bride's father, though rich, is -disinclined to spend a large amount on the marriage func- tions and allows the bridi:groom to incur the whole or part of it, it cannot' be said that he has received any consideration or price for the bride. Though in such a case if the bridegroom's father had not inc'Uffed the said expenditure in whole or in • part, the bride's father might have to spend somc·moncy on that account, such an indirect result could not be described as price or consideration for giving the bride. Asura marriage is a marriage where the bride's father or any other person entitled to give away the bride takes Sulka or price for giving the bride in marriage. The test is two-fold. There shall not ooly be a benefit to the father, but that benefit shall form a consid
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.