# Bhusawal Borough Municipality v. Amalgamated Electricity Co., Ltd. & Anr

- **Citation:** [1964] 5 S.C.R. 911
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1963-12-11
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 316 of 1959
- **Bench:** P.B. Gajendragadkar, K.C. Das Gupta
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/bhusawal-borough-municipality-v-amalgamated-electricity-co-ltd-anr-3054
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Hindu Law--Jntercaste marriage-Marriage before the ActIf the Act has retrospective 4fect-The Hindu Marriages Validity
Act, 1949 (Act 21 of 1949), s. 3.
The minor respondent no. 1 brought a suit for partition on
a claim that on his birth he became a member of the joint Hindu
family which his father Sadagopa Naidu, the first defendant,
in the suit, formed with the other nine persons impleaded as defendants 2 to 10. His case was that Padmavathi and Sada Gopa
were validly married on June 24, 1948 and of that marriage he
was born. The case of the defendant was that the impugned
marriage was not a valid marriage as Padmavathi was a Brahmin
girl and Sada Gopa a Shudra. On these facts the Trial Court passed
a preliminary decree for partition in favour of the respondent no.
I. The Trial Court was of opinion that the marriage would be
invalid according to the Hindu Law as it stood before the Hindu
Marriages Validity Act, 1949. It held however that the position
had been entirely changed by s. 3 of the Hindu Marriages Validity
Act, 1949 and that the marriage was validated by the Act of 1949.
On appeal by the defendants, the High Court affirmed the judgment
and decree passed by the trial court. Hence this appeal.
Held:
(i) The Hindu Marriages Validity Act, 1949 was
however in terms retrospective and validated marriages that had
taken place before the Act between parties belonging to different
1963
Bhusawal
Borough
Municipality
v.
Amalgamated
Electricity Co.,
Ltd. & Anr.
Mudholkar J.
1963
December I
912
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1964]
castes, sub-castes and sects. It is idle to say that the object of the
legislature was only to regularise the status of the Husband and
v. R. Sadagopa the Wife. That certainly was part of the object. But equally
Naidu
important, or perhaps more important object was that the children
1963
v. ·
of the marriages would become legitimate.
Bakthavatsa/am
On the facts of this case it was held that the impugned marriage
& Anr.
was a valid Hindu marriage and the respondent no. I a legitimate
son of Sadagopa with all the rights of a coparcener in regard to
the joint family properties and other matters.
Das Gupta J.
CIVIL
APPELLATE
JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal
No. 316 of 1959.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and
decree dated August 22, 1959 of the Madras High
"'
Court in Appeal No. 282 of 1952.
G.S. Pathak, B. Dutta, T.R. Ramchandra, J.B.
-
Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for
"
the appellants.
H.N. · Sanyal, Solicitor General of India, K. Jayaram and R. Ganapathy Iyer, for respondent no. 1.
N. Panchapagesa Iyer, M.P. Swami
and
R.
Thiagarajan, for respondent no. 2.
December 11, 1963. The Judgment of the Court
was delivered by
DAS GUPTA J.-Thirteen-month old
Bhakthavathsalam brought this suit for partition on a claim
that on his birth he became a member of the joint
Hindu family which his father V.R. Sadagopa Naidu,
the first defendant, in the suit, formed with the other
nine persons impleaded as defendents 2 to 10. His
case is that Padmavathi and Sadagopa were validly
married on June 24, 1948 and of that marriage he
was born. The main contention of the contesting
defendants is that there was never any marriage of
Padmavathi and Sadagopa and that Bhakthavathsalam is not Sadagopa's son.
On both these points the Trial Court found the
plaintiffs' case proved and rejected the defence pleas.
At the trial a further point was raised that even if
any marriage between Padmavathi and Sadagopa
f:
5.S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
913
did take place that was not a valid marriage as Padma1963
vathi was a Brahmin girl and Sadagopa a Shudra.
--
The Trial Court was of opinion that Padmavathi V. R. Sadagopa
was . a Brahmin, and as admittedly Sadagopa was
Naidu
a Shudra, the marriage would be invalid according
w
to the Hindu Law as it stood before the Hindu Bakthavatsalam
Marriages Validity Act, 1949. It held however that
& Anr.
the position had been entirely changed by section 3
of this Act and that ,even if Padmavathi belo

## Text

:,
•. "'
~-
i
. .
1~
5 S.C.R.
SUPREME COURf REPORTS
911
iary value but is one upon which the claim of the
respondent no. 1 for the surcharge is based. Misconstruction of such a document would thus be an
error of law and the High Court in second appeal
would be entitled to correct it. This is what in fact
has been done.
There is no substance in the appeals which are
dismissed with costs.
Appeals dismissed.
V.R. SADAGOPA NAIDU
v.
BAKTHAVATSALAM & ANR.
(P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR AND K.C. DAS GUPTA, JJ.)
Hindu Law--Jntercaste marriage-Marriage before the ActIf the Act has retrospective 4fect-The Hindu Marriages Validity
Act, 1949 (Act 21 of 1949), s. 3.
The minor respondent no. 1 brought a suit for partition on
a claim that on his birth he became a member of the joint Hindu
family which his father Sadagopa Naidu, the first defendant,
in the suit, formed with the other nine persons impleaded as defendants 2 to 10. His case was that Padmavathi and Sada Gopa
were validly married on June 24, 1948 and of that marriage he
was born. The case of the defendant was that the impugned
marriage was not a valid marriage as Padmavathi was a Brahmin
girl and Sada Gopa a Shudra. On these facts the Trial Court passed
a preliminary decree for partition in favour of the respondent no.
I. The Trial Court was of opinion that the marriage would be
invalid according to the Hindu Law as it stood before the Hindu
Marriages Validity Act, 1949. It held however that the position
had been entirely changed by s. 3 of the Hindu Marriages Validity
Act, 1949 and that the marriage was validated by the Act of 1949.
On appeal by the defendants, the High Court affirmed the judgment
and decree passed by the trial court. Hence this appeal.
Held:
(i) The Hindu Marriages Validity Act, 1949 was
however in terms retrospective and validated marriages that had
taken place before the Act between parties belonging to different
1963
Bhusawal
Borough
Municipality
v.
Amalgamated
Electricity Co.,
Ltd. & Anr.
Mudholkar J.
1963
December I
912
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1964]
castes, sub-castes and sects. It is idle to say that the object of the
legislature was only to regularise the status of the Husband and
v. R. Sadagopa the Wife. That certainly was part of the object. But equally
Naidu
important, or perhaps more important object was that the children
1963
v. ·
of the marriages would become legitimate.
Bakthavatsa/am
On the facts of this case it was held that the impugned marriage
& Anr.
was a valid Hindu marriage and the respondent no. I a legitimate
son of Sadagopa with all the rights of a coparcener in regard to
the joint family properties and other matters.
Das Gupta J.
CIVIL
APPELLATE
JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal
No. 316 of 1959.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and
decree dated August 22, 1959 of the Madras High
"'
Court in Appeal No. 282 of 1952.
G.S. Pathak, B. Dutta, T.R. Ramchandra, J.B.
-
Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for
"
the appellants.
H.N. · Sanyal, Solicitor General of India, K. Jayaram and R. Ganapathy Iyer, for respondent no. 1.
N. Panchapagesa Iyer, M.P. Swami
and
R.
Thiagarajan, for respondent no. 2.
December 11, 1963. The Judgment of the Court
was delivered by
DAS GUPTA J.-Thirteen-month old
Bhakthavathsalam brought this suit for partition on a claim
that on his birth he became a member of the joint
Hindu family which his father V.R. Sadagopa Naidu,
the first defendant, in the suit, formed with the other
nine persons impleaded as defendents 2 to 10. His
case is that Padmavathi and Sadagopa were validly
married on June 24, 1948 and of that marriage he
was born. The main contention of the contesting
defendants is that there was never any marriage of
Padmavathi and Sadagopa and that Bhakthavathsalam is not Sadagopa's son.
On both these points the Trial Court found the
plaintiffs' case proved and rejected the defence pleas.
At the trial a further point was raised that even if
any marriage between Padmavathi and Sadagopa
f:
5.S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
913
did take place that was not a valid marriage as Padma1963
vathi was a Brahmin girl and Sadagopa a Shudra.
--
The Trial Court was of opinion that Padmavathi V. R. Sadagopa
was . a Brahmin, and as admittedly Sadagopa was
Naidu
a Shudra, the marriage would be invalid according
w
to the Hindu Law as it stood before the Hindu Bakthavatsalam
Marriages Validity Act, 1949. It held however that
& Anr.
the position had been entirely changed by section 3
of this Act and that ,even if Padmavathi belonged Das Gupta J.
to the Brahmin caste and not to the caste to which
Sadagopa belonged the marriage is valid under the
existing law. The validity of the Act itself appears
to have been challenged before the Trial Court, but,
this was rejected. In the result, the Trial Court
passed a preliminary decreP. for partition providing
for allotment to the plaintiff of 1 /8th share of the
property set out in the plaint. Some other directions
were also given in the decree, with which however
we are not concerned.
On appeal by the defendants, the High Court
of Judicature at Madras agreed with the Trial Court
that Padmavathi and Sadagopa had been duly married
and
that the
plaintiff Bhakthavathasalam was
the issue of that marriage, being born of Padmavathi
to Sadagopa. The High Court was however of opinion that Padmavathi was a Shudra, the same as
Sadagopa. Assuming however for argument's sake
that Padmavathi was a Brahmin the High Court
agreed with the Trial Court that the marriage was
validated by the Hindu Marriages Validity Act,
1949, and so, the plaintiff would have all the rights
of legitimate son vis-a-vis the coparcenary to which
his father belonged. The validity of the Act was
unsuccessfully challenged. Accordingly, the
High
Court affirmed the judgment and dec~ee passed by
the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal.
Against
this decision of the High Court the present appeal
has been filed by the defendants with special leave.
In support of the appeal, Mr. Pathak tried first
to attack the concurrent findings of facts of the courts
below as regards the marriage between Sadagopa
1/SCI/64-5.8
914
SUPREME. COURT REPORTS
[1964]
1963
and Padmavathi lihd the fact of the plaintiff being
-
born of Padmavathi to Sadagopa in that marriage.
V, R. Sadagopa Learned counsel wanted to say that the findings
Naidu
of the High Court on these points were vitiated by
"·
misreading of important items of evidence. He could
Bakthavatsalam not however point out any such misreading nor
& Anr.
any other error to justify our re-assessment of the
Das Gupta}. evidence.
Having failed in this attempt Mr. Pathak contended that as a matter of law the plaintiff did not
· become a legitimate son of Sadagopa inspite of the
provisions of the Hindu Marriages Validity Act,
1949.
According to the learned counsel the only
effect of this Act is that the marriage becomes valid
and it has no effect as regards the legitimacy of the
child born before the date of the Act.
'
The relevant provisions of the Act is in s. 3 and
is in these words:-
''.Notwithstanding anything contained in any
other law for the time being in force or in any
text, or interpretation of Hindu law, or in any
custom or usage, no marriage between Hindus
shall be deemed to be invalid or ever to have
been invalid by reason only of the fact that the
parties thereto belonged to different religions,
castes, sub-castes or sects."
For his proposition the learned counsel could
not cite any authority; and that is natural because
the contention raised is entirely misconceived and
can be characterised as extravagant. He tried to
persuade us however that a proper construction of
the words used in the section justifies the conclusion
that it was the status of the parties to the marriage
that was only sought to be affected. He conceded
that in the case of every marriage celebrated after
the date of the Act, the result of the marriage being
valid would be, that the children born of the marriage
would be 'legitimate, but argued that the same result
would i10t follow in the case of a marriage which
having been celebrated before the date of the Act
was invalid at the time and the children were illegiti-
'.~.,1····i.
~·
•
t.1
··t
~
'
•
•
5 S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
915
I
mate then. The illegitimate children , he argues, were
1963
not made legitimate by this Act. For that purpose
-
an express provision was necessary, according to V. R. S~dagopa
the learned counsel.
In support of his arguments
Naidu
he has drawn our attention to the wordings of s. 1
v.
of the Hindu Widows' Re-Marriage Act, 1856, which Bakthavatsalam
is in these words:-
& Anr.
"No marriage contracted between Hindus
shall be invalid, and the issue of no such marriage Das Gupta J.
shall be illegitimate, by reason of the women
having been previously married or betrothed
to another person who was dead at the time
of such marriage, any custom and any interpretation of Hindu law to the contrary notwithstanding."
The absence of any phrase similar to "the issue
of no such marriage shall be illegitimate" in the
Hindu Marriages Validity Act, 1949, is claimed by
the learned counsel to support his contention.
We cannot agree. In our opinion, the use o'f
the words "the issue of no such marriage shall be
illegitimate" was not really necessary in s. 1 of the
Hindu Widows' Re-Marriage Act, and even without
these words the effect of a marriage being valid would
necessarily have been that the issue of the marriage
was legitimate. These words were put in the section
by the legislature in 1856 as a matter of abundant
caution. The absence of such words in the Hindu
Marriages Validity Act, 1949 is of no consequence.
If the Act had not retrospectively validated marriages
celebrated before the date of the Act. the children
of those marriages could not have claimed to be
legitimate. The Act was however in terms retrospective and validated marriages that had taken place
before the Act between parties belonging to different
castes, sub-castes and sects. It is idle to contend
that the object of the legislature was only to regularise the status of the husband and the wife. That
certainly was part of the object. But equally important, or perhaps more important object was that the
children of the marriages would become legitimate.
916
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[1964]
J963
We have therefore come to the conclusion that
. -
even if the Trial Court was right in thinking that
V.R. Sadagopa Padmavathi was a Brahmin girl and not a Shudra,
Naidu
the position in law was, as found by the courts below,
v;
viz., it was a valid Hindu marriage and BhakthavathaBakthavatsalam salam a legitimate son of Sadagopa with all the rights
& Anr.
of a coparcener in regard to the joint family properDas Gupta J.
1963
December 11
ties and other matters.
No other point was urged in appeal. The appeal
is accordingly dismissed with costs.
Appeal dismissed.
MATHUR! AND ORS.
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB
(P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR AND K.C. DAS GUPTA JJ.)
Indian Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), ss.149 and 441 and
Code of Civil Procedure (Act V of 1900) O.XXI, rr. 24 and 25Decree for possession-Period of execution warrants expiredAttempt by landlords to take possession-If criminal trespass-
"Intention to annoy", meaning of-Resistance by tenants-If unlawful assembly.
The appellants (in the main appeal) along with some others
were tried for offences under ss. 148, 302 and 307 read withs. 149
of the Indian Penal Code. The occurrence leading to their trial
was as follows. Certain landlords got decrees for possession and
armed with warrants for execution of the decrees and with the
assistance of police they tried to execute the warrant and dispossess
the tenants. The period of execution of the warrants had expired.
A large armed mob including the appellants resisted and on the
order of the District Magistrate the police opened fire. Ten
persons from the mob and two persons from the other side died
and a number of persons were injured. The appellants were
found lying injured at the scene of occurrence after the mob retired, The Sessions Judge convicted all the appellants of the
offences under s. 148 of the Indian Penal Code and under
s. 304 part I~ read with s. 149 and under s. 326/149 s. 324/149
and 532/149 an? sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for
]