Question

Ashima and Ashok got married to each other in a traditional Hindu ceremony in Kolkata, after which they both moved to the USA, where Ashok had a job. In the USA, they had a child, whom they named Gogol. Many years later, Ashima found that Ashok was already married to Sushma before their wedding in Kolkata. Ashok and Sushma also had a child from their marriage, Arpita, who was older than Gogol by 4 years. Ashok explained to Ashima that although he had no intention of cheating on her, he had to keep his marriage to Sushma a secret since his parents would have never agreed as Sushma belonged to a different caste. Ashima is shocked to learn that her marriage to Ashok is void as per Hindu marriage laws since Ashok was already married before their wedding. She is trying to explore possibilities so that Gogol doesn’t lose his inheritance from his father’s side of the family. Based on your reading of the passage, what do you think is the correct position with respect to Gogol’s inheritance rights?

• A. Gogol could claim the entirety of Ashok’s share of the ancestral property
• B. Gogol would inherit the entire ancestral property as the only son of Ashok.
• C. Gogol would inherit his share from within Ashok’s share of the full ancestral property without prejudice to the inheritance of other legal heirs, including Arpita.
• D. Only Sushma and Arpita are the rightful legal heirs of Ashok.
• A. Sushma and Ashima.
• B. Sushma, Ashima, Arpita, and Gogol, as they are all his rightful legal heirs
• C. Sushma, Arpita, and Gogol.
• D. Sushma and Arpita.
• A. The amended provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act grant legitimacy to children from voidable marriages and therefore this logic should be extended to children born of voidable and void marriages under the Hindu Succession Act.
• B. The amended provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act give legitimacy to the second marriage and therefore this should also have an impact on the Hindu Succession Act.
• C. The amended provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act grant legitimate status to children from void or voidable marriages and therefore this should also extend to the Hindu Succession Act.
• D. The Hindu Marriage Act has no bearing on the case in question
• A. Kausalya’s children cannot inherit Dashrath’s ancestral property but can inherit his self-acquired property.
• B. Both Ram and Lakshman can inherit their father’s share of the ancestral property irrespective of the voidable status of their parent’s marriage.
• C. If Kausalya decides to annul her voidable marriage, she and her sons would lose all rights of inheriting ancestral property from Dashrath.
• D. Ram and Lakshman can only inherit ancestral property from their mother’s side since she decided to annul the voidable marriage
• A. He would say that her children can still inherit property from Ajay thanks to the Supreme Court judgment.
• B. He would advise her to get her marriage registered so that they can inherit property
• C. He would advise her to ignore her marriage with Ajay since it is anyway a void marriage.
• D. He would advise her to speak to Diya and sort it out with her so that her children can inherit property since she would have the final say.
• A. No, she cannot inherit property as the judgment merely talks about the rights of children from void marriages.
• B. Yes, she should fight for her rights to inherit property.
• C. Yes, Ajay would have to give her property since he cheated on her.
• D. She would get an equal share of property as Diya, since they are both his wives who got married to him without knowing about each other.
• A. Dhanalakshmi would not have any right in her mother’s share of the property since the right of inheritance pertains only to father’s share of property.
• B. Dhanalakshmi could demand a notional partition and get a share from Srimati’s portion of her ancestral property.
• C. Being a child from a void marriage, Dhanalakshmi has no rights of inheritance.
• D. It is Srimati’s decision as to whom she gives rights in her property.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Understanding the situation of Gogol's inheritance rights:
In the passage, Ashok’s marriage to Ashima is found to be void because Ashok was already married to Sushma before his marriage to Ashima, making their marriage legally invalid. However, the focus here is on Gogol, Ashok’s child with Ashima, and his right to inherit from Ashok’s ancestral property.

Step 2: Legal rights of children from void marriages:
Despite the void status of Ashok's marriage to Ashima, Gogol, being a legitimate child of Ashok, still has the right to inherit his father’s ancestral property. Under Indian law, children born from a void marriage are still considered legitimate for purposes of inheritance.

Step 3: Inheritance from Ashok’s share:
The ancestral property, being passed down from Ashok, would be divided among Ashok’s legal heirs, which include his wife (Sushma), his child from his first marriage (Arpita), and his child from his second marriage (Gogol). Therefore, Gogol would inherit his share from within Ashok’s portion of the ancestral property without prejudice to the inheritance rights of other legal heirs, including Arpita.

Step 4: Conclusion:
The correct position regarding Gogol’s inheritance rights is: Gogol would inherit his share from within Ashok’s share of the full ancestral property without prejudice to the inheritance of other legal heirs, including Arpita.

Answer 2

Step 1: Understanding the concept of self-acquired property:
In the passage, Ashok purchased property from his own earnings in the USA, which makes it self-acquired property. Self-acquired property is property that a person earns or acquires by their own efforts, rather than inheriting it from an ancestor. Unlike ancestral property, which is passed down through generations, self-acquired property remains under the ownership of the person who acquired it unless they decide to transfer it via a will or through inheritance laws.

Step 2: Analyzing inheritance rights:
Upon Ashok’s death, his self-acquired property would be inherited by his legal heirs as per the laws of succession. Typically, the legal heirs include his wife, children, and possibly other dependents. Based on the typical structure of inheritance under Hindu law or similar succession laws, his wife (Sushma), and his children (Arpita and Gogol) would inherit the property.

Step 3: Conclusion:
The correct answer is: Sushma, Arpita, and Gogol, as they would be the legal heirs to Ashok’s self-acquired property.

Answer 3

Step 1: Understanding the influence of the Hindu Marriage Act:
The Hindu Marriage Act governs the legal aspects of marriage and divorce for Hindus. The Act includes provisions for marriages that are considered void or voidable. The amendment to the Act grants legitimate status to children born from void or voidable marriages. This means that children from these marriages are still considered legally legitimate in terms of inheritance rights.

Step 2: Connecting the Hindu Marriage Act to the Hindu Succession Act:
The Hindu Succession Act governs the inheritance and succession of property among Hindus. The amended provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, which grant legitimate status to children from void or voidable marriages, should extend to the Hindu Succession Act. This ensures that children from these marriages have the same inheritance rights as those from valid marriages.

Step 3: Conclusion:
The correct answer is: The amended provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act grant legitimate status to children from void or voidable marriages and therefore this should also extend to the Hindu Succession Act. This reflects the legal framework that ensures equal inheritance rights for all children, regardless of the status of their parents’ marriage.

Answer 4

Step 1: Understanding the concept of voidable marriages:
In the passage, Kausalya was married at the age of 12 to Dashrath, and her younger sister, Vershini, advises her that since Kausalya was married before turning 18, her marriage could be considered voidable. A voidable marriage is one that is valid until it is annulled, meaning that while the marriage can be legally annulled, it is not automatically considered void.

Step 2: Analyzing the legal implications for children:
Even though Kausalya’s marriage could be annulled, this does not affect the legitimacy of her children. In India, children born from a voidable marriage are considered legitimate in terms of inheritance. Therefore, Kausalya’s sons, Ram and Lakshman, are entitled to inherit their father Dashrath's ancestral property, irrespective of the annulment or voidable status of their parents’ marriage.

Step 3: Conclusion:
The correct answer is: Both Ram and Lakshman can inherit their father’s share of the ancestral property irrespective of the voidable status of their parent’s marriage. This is because the children’s right to inherit is not affected by the status of the marriage.

Answer 5

Step 1: Analyzing the situation of Riya and her children:
The passage outlines that Riya was married to Ajay after his first marriage to Diya. She later finds out that her marriage to Ajay is void because Ajay was already married to Diya when he married Riya. Despite the void status of Riya’s marriage, Riya and Ajay have two children, Raj and Rani.

Step 2: Legal position on the validity of the marriage and children’s inheritance rights:
Even though Riya’s marriage to Ajay is void, the children from the marriage (Raj and Rani) are still considered legitimate in terms of inheritance. According to a Supreme Court judgment, children born from a void marriage are still entitled to inherit property, as the court recognizes the legitimacy of children even if the marriage itself was not legally valid.

Step 3: Legal advice to Riya:
Based on the Supreme Court’s judgment regarding the inheritance rights of children born from a void marriage, the lawyer would inform Riya that her children, Raj and Rani, have the legal right to inherit property from Ajay, despite the void nature of her marriage.

Step 4: Conclusion:
The most legally sound advice the lawyer could give to Riya is that her children can still inherit property from Ajay thanks to the Supreme Court judgment that recognizes the legitimacy of children from void marriages in terms of inheritance rights.

Answer 6

Step 1: Understanding the context of the judgment:
The previous judgment in the scenario pertains to the rights of children born from void marriages, specifically Dhanalakshmi’s right to inherit her mother’s ancestral property. The judgment in question would have clarified how children from void marriages can assert their right to inheritance, given that the marriage was deemed void but the children are still considered legitimate in terms of property rights.

Step 2: Analyzing the situation of Riya:
In this case, Riya wants to know if there is any way she can inherit property owned by Ajay. It is crucial to differentiate between the rights discussed in the earlier judgment (relating to children from void marriages) and Riya’s situation. The judgment in question is specifically concerned with the inheritance rights of children from void marriages, not about inheriting property from someone like Ajay, who is not mentioned to be in a similar situation.

Step 3: The correct position of law:
Since the judgment only addresses the rights of children from void marriages and does not extend to inheritance from other individuals (like Ajay), Riya would not be able to rely on this judgment to inherit Ajay’s property.

Step 4: Conclusion:
The correct position of law is that Riya cannot inherit property as the judgment merely talks about the rights of children from void marriages, and does not extend to other inheritance scenarios like the one involving Ajay.

Answer 7

Step 1: Understanding the situation:
Srimati’s first marriage was void due to being within the prohibited degree of relationship. Dhanalakshmi, Srimati’s daughter from this first marriage, claims her share in her mother’s ancestral property. Srimati later married Dhrupad and had two daughters, Ira and Shira, but she does not want to share the property with Dhanalakshmi.

Step 2: Legal implications of the void marriage:
A void marriage means that Dhanalakshmi is considered a legitimate child from Srimati's first marriage, despite the marriage being void. Therefore, Dhanalakshmi would have legal rights as Srimati’s daughter, specifically when it comes to the ancestral property.

Step 3: Property rights in ancestral property:
In cases of ancestral property, the share of the daughter, if she is a legitimate heir, is determined based on the distribution rules of the property. Since Dhanalakshmi is legally considered Srimati’s daughter, she has a rightful claim to her mother’s ancestral property.

Step 4: Notional partition:
Dhanalakshmi could demand a notional partition. This means that the property would be divided as if Srimati were still alive, and her share of the ancestral property would be calculated. From this, Dhanalakshmi could get a share from Srimati’s portion of the property, even though Srimati is not interested in giving it to her.

Step 5: Conclusion:
Dhanalakshmi could demand a notional partition and get a share from Srimati’s portion of her ancestral property. This would entitle her to her rightful share as per legal entitlement.