This article is written by Shafaq Gupta. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the judgement delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in R. Lakshmi Narayan v. Santhi. It deals with insanity as a ground for declaring a marriage null and void as per Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the degree of burden of proof upon the person who files a petition for the same. The article delves into the various conditions necessary for the fulfilment of marriage and on what grounds they can be considered voidable.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Marriage can be defined as a union between a man and a woman. In earlier times, the main purpose behind marriage was the procreation of children, but the perception has changed nowadays. Rather than a sacrament, it has become more of a social contract that affects all the spheres of life of two individuals, whether social, personal or psychological. Hindu marriages are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (herein referred to as HMA). It provides for the various conditions of marriage which must be fulfilled for a valid marriage and also the grounds on which the marriage can be nullified.
The case of R Lakshmi Narayan v. Santhi (2001) deals with insanity as a ground to nullify a marriage solemnised under the HMA, 1955. According to the law, one of the parties to a marriage must be suffering from a mental disorder. It should be to such an extent that he/she becomes unfit for marriage and procreation. These conditions must be met in order to claim insanity as a ground for annulment of marriage. In this article, we will deal with this issue in detail and also analyse the judgement.
Details of the case
- Name of the case: R Lakshmi Narayan v. Santhi
- Citation:AIR 2001 SC 2110, 2001 4 SCC 688; 2001 3 SCR 329
- Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 5028 of 1999.
- Appellant: R. Lakshmi Narayan
- Respondent: Santhi
- Date of Judgement: 1st May, 2001
- Bench: Hon’ble Justice D.P. Mohapatra and Hon’ble Justice U.C. Banerjee.
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Relevant provisions involved: The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Sections 5(ii)(b) and Section 12(1)(b);
Constitution Of India: Article 136
Facts of R. Lakshmi Narayan vs. Santhi (2001)
Marriage between R. Lakshmi Narayan and Santhi was solemnised on 01-11-1987 as per the Hindu rites and customs. Only after meeting each other and having a conversation, the decision of marriage was made. They lived together after the marriage for around 25 days. After that, they separated, and the husband (appellant) filed a petition before the trial Court to declare their marriage null and void under Section 5(ii)(b) and Section 12(1)(b) of HMA, 1955.
The appellant alleged that his wife (respondent) had an incurable mental condition, and he came to know about the same after their marriage. He had inquired about the same from her parents, and they had also revealed that their daughter had been suffering from a mental condition since her childhood. He contended that he had made enough efforts to cure her disease, but no results were seen. He also said that her wife had no interest in continuing a marital relationship with him. The respondent refused to accept any of the allegations and told the Court that she did not have any mental illness and wanted to continue her marriage with the petitioner.
The Trial Court assessed the situation based on the evidence produced and held that the respondent was not suffering from any incurable mental illness as required under Section 5(ii)(b) of the Act. The burden of proof was on the petitioner, and he could not prove his contentions beyond reasonable doubt. The behaviour of the respondent was also observed while questioning in the court, and she was able to understand the nature of questions asked from her and answered each of them very clearly. The Court opined that she was good enough to continue her marital relationship and even cohabited with the petitioner. The petition filed by the petitioner was not found to be sustainable as it was filed within one year of marriage. The Trial Court ruled in favour of the respondent and did not declare the marriage null and void. It dismissed the petition.
Aggrieved by the judgement of the Trial Court, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Hon’ble High Court. The High Court overturned the judgement pronounced by the Trial Court and allowed the petition. It ruled that the trial Court made an error by not considering the documentary evidence of the prescription issued by Dr. Papa Kumari of Chennai, which showed that the respondent was mentally ill. There had been no cohabitation between the parties as the parties had separated shortly after the marriage. The Court considered all the evidence produced by the respondent in which she herself admitted that she had some mental condition since childhood and used to take injections once a month. Based on these factors, the High Court declared their marriage null and void.
Aggrieved by the judgement of the appellate Court, the respondent filed a second appeal in the High Court, which was allowed. In the second appeal, the High Court overturned the judgement pronounced in the first appeal and restored the judgement pronounced by the Trial Court. The reason stated behind such a decision was that the appellant had sufficient time as well as the opportunity to meet the respondent and gain knowledge about her mental condition. No fraud or misrepresentation had been committed by the respondent, as both of them had met each other before marriage. The Court rejected all the allegations made by the appellant and did not declare their marriage to be void.
The appellant felt very discontented and filed a special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
Issues raised
- Whether the special leave to appeal filed by the appellant with regards to declaring his marriage null and void under Sections 5(ii) (b) and Section 12(1)(b) of HMA, 1955, is admissible?
- Does the burden of proof lie on the appellant to prove his allegations beyond reasonable doubt for marriage to be declared void?
Arguments of the parties
The following arguments were made by the petitioner and the respondent to substantiate their allegations:
Petitioner
- The appellant husband in the present case argued that his wife was suffering from an incurable and chronic mental disorder and was unfit to continue the marital relationship with him.
- He alleged that the respondent was found to be drowsy on the night of the marriage and refused to cohabit with him on the pretext of suffering from some mental condition.
- The appellant contended that the respondent herself admitted that she married due to the pressure of her parents and did not want to continue the marital relationship.
- On being asked, the father of the respondent told the appellant that his daughter had been suffering from a mental disorder since childhood and was undergoing treatment for the same.
- The father of the respondent said that he tried to cure the ailment of his daughter but had not been successful yet.
- The prescription issued by Dr. Papa Kumari of Chennai was given to the appellant by the respondent’s father, which showed that Santhi used to take injections once a month and also consumed drugs in case of severe headaches.
- The appellant finally argued that based on the above facts and circumstances, he wouldn’t be able to continue living with his wife and that their marriage should be declared null and void on the grounds of insanity of the respondent and his petition be declared admissible in the Court.
Respondent
- The respondent in the present case denied all the allegations the petitioner made and said they were untrue.
- The respondent alleged that she was not suffering from any kind of mental disorder and was fit to continue the marital relationship.
- She also contended that she cohabited with the appellant and never showed any disinterest in continuing a marital relationship with him.
- The respondent told the Court that they both were living a happy married life and also went to various temples. She expressed her will to continue marriage in a peaceful manner.
- The respondent argued that it was the appellant who was interested in a second marriage so that he could get more dowry. Due to this reason, he filed a petition to declare the marriage null and void.
- The respondent finally contended that it was due to the denial by the appellant to continue marriage that she was not able to live a normal married life.
Involved legal aspects
The relevant provisions of HMA,1955 dealt in this case are as follows:
Section 5: Conditions to be fulfilled for a Hindu marriage
For the solemnisation of marriage between two Hindus, the following conditions must be met-
- Neither of them must be having a spouse living at the time of marriage.
- They should be capable of giving valid consent and must not be of unsound mind.
- Even though they are capable of giving valid consent, they must not be suffering from a mental disorder to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and unable to procreate.
- He/she must not suffer from continuous attacks of insanity.
- At the time of marriage, the age of the bride must not be less than 18 years, and that of the bridegroom must not be below 21 years of age.
- The parties to a marriage must not be within the degrees of prohibited relationship unless their custom allows so.
- The parties to a marriage must not be sapindas of each other unless their custom allows so.
Section 12: Voidable marriages
A voidable marriage can be nullified on the following grounds-
- The marriage has not been consummated because the respondent is impotent.
- Any marriage which has been solemnised in breach of conditions specified under clause (ii) of Section 5.
- The consent of the petitioner to the marriage was obtained by force
- The respondent was already pregnant before the marriage by someone other than the petitioner.
Judgement in R. Lakshmi Narayan vs. Santhi (2001)
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant with no order as to costs. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court did not find it appropriate to interfere with the judgement of the High Court by exercising its jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The Court denied the request made by the appellant to remit the case to the High Court for fresh disposal. However, the judgement delivered by the High Court was not found to be satisfactory as it failed to frame any questions of law as per Section 100 (second appeal) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Rationale behind this judgement
The rationale behind the present judgement was that for the declaration of the marriage as null and void as per Sections 5(ii)(b) and Section 12(1)(b) of HMA, 1955, the case must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. It had to be proved that one of the parties to the marriage had been suffering from a mental disorder to such an extent that he/she became unfit for marriage and could not procreate. The fact that the respondent was suffering from some mental disorder and they did not cohabit together was not sufficient to come to a conclusion that the respondent was unfit for marriage. The burden of proof lies on the person who files the appeal for the same. It must be an established fact that the wife cannot continue to live a normal married life. It was concluded that the decision cannot be made on the basis of mere possibilities. The degree of defect must be taken into consideration along with all other relevant factors.
The judgement of the High Court was found to be unsatisfactory by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Court did not find it reasonable to declare the marriage null and void, as the High Court overlooked many relevant aspects other than the fraud and misrepresentation about the mental condition of the respondent by her parents. It just focused on the allegations of fraud and misrepresentation done by the parents of the respondent. The High Court did not comply with the mandatory requisites given under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code as it did not frame any relevant questions of law in the judgement. Therefore, The marriage could not be declared void as per the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can say that the Supreme Court was justified in dismissing the appeal as the degree of defect of mental disorder should be such, which renders the person unfit for marriage and procreation. The nature and trend of marriages have changed in recent times. Not having cohabitation for a month and suffering from a mental disorder does not render the person unfit for marriage. The marriage, which is the holy union of a man and a woman and carries societal as well as family obligations, cannot be annulled on the basis of mere possibilities. The petitioner needs to prove his allegations beyond reasonable doubt for it to be successful.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What do you mean by the word ‘voidable’?
Voidable basically means it is not void per se but is capable of being nullified or invalidated. It can be invalidated on the grounds provided in Section 12 of HMA,1955.
What are the three parameters of insanity as provided in HMA, 1955?
The three parameters of insanity are provided under Section 5 of HMA, 1955. These are:
- For a valid Hindu marriage, the person must not be of unsound mind and should be capable of giving consent to marriage.
- Though capable of giving consent, he/she must not suffer from any mental illness which renders him/her unfit for marriage and procreation.
- He must not suffer from recurrent attacks of insanity.
What is the difference between void and voidable marriages?
Void marriages have been defined under Section 11 and voidable marriages under Section 12 of HMA,1955. Void marriage basically refers to a marriage that is void ab initio i.e. invalid from the very beginning. The child conceived out of a void marriage is considered to be legitimate, but maintenance cannot be claimed by the wife. Voidable marriages refer to a marriage which can be declared void by a decree of the Court, and maintenance can be claimed out of such marriages.
References
Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal content.
