top of page

Mohammed Salim v. Shamsudeen

  • Writer: shrey singh
    shrey singh
  • Jan 4, 2020
  • 2 min read

Mohammed Salim v. Shamsudeen

Civil Appeal No. 5158 of 2013 decided on 22.01.2019

Bench

NV Ramana and MM Shantanagoudar, JJ

Fact

The first wife of M, who was a Muslim, and no child was born out of the said wedlock. Thereafter, M married V in 1945. V was a Hindu at the time of her marriage with M. Out of the said wedlock, the Petitioner was born. Subsequent to the death of M in 1947. The Petitioner claimed that he was the only son of M and on his death, he became entitled to the share in M’s property.

Held

The Court said the Petitioner is entitled to M’s property and the marriage of a Muslim man with an idolater or fireworshipper is neither a valid (sahih) nor a void (batil) marriage but is merely an invalid/irregular (fasid) marriage.

Summary

Question of law

Whether a child born out of irregular marriage can claim share in his father property?

Judgment

 The Court asserted that a child born out of irregular marriage can claim share in his father property. Furthermore, it was held that the legal effect of a irregular marriage(fasid) marriage is that in case of consummation, though the wife is entitled to get dower, she is not entitled to inherit the properties of the husband.  But the child born in that marriage is legitimate just like in the case of a valid marriage, and is entitled to inherit the property of the father.

Share this:

コメント


©2020 by Paul & Associates. 

bottom of page