RAJA GOUNDER AND OTHERS VERSUS M. SENGODAN AND OTHERS Citation: 2024 (SC) 48
FACTS: Briefly put, one Muthusamy Gounder (dead) is a common predecessor in interest. He had three marriages out of which two marriages were declared void. Out of these three marriages, Gounder has five children i.e., four sons and one daughter. The legitimate son (Respondent no.3) born out of a valid marriage filed the suit for partition before the trial court. Moreover, the children born out of a void marriage were also impleaded as defendants before the trial court. The trial court decreed the suit for partition in favour of the legitimate child.
ISSUE: Whether children born out of void marriages would be entitled to share in the property of a common ancestors as his successors?
Challenging the order/judgment of the trial court, the children from void marriage preferred an appeal before the High Court. However, the appeal was dismissed by the High Court.
It is against the impugned order/judgment of the High Court that the present Civil Appeal was preferred before the Supreme Court. No costs.
DECISION:
In light of the admission made by the common ancestor, the court took perusal of certain documentary evidences to draw an inference that the common ancestor treated the children born out of void marriage as his legitimate children. The court noted that the children born out of void marriages would be treated as successors in the interest of Muthusamy Gounder, and accordingly the shares need to be worked out.In Revanasiddappa and another v. Mallikarjun and others, noted that the children born out of void or voidable marriage would possess rights in their parent's property but ancestral property. While relying on the aforesaid judgment, the court in the present case upheld the entitlement of the children born out of void and voidable marriage in the common ancestor property and passed the decree of partition accordingly. Accordingly, the appeals were allowed.
