praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
Try to add value to the discussion, with your each post.
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
Rama chary Rachakonda (Secunderabad/Telangana state Highcourt practice watsapp no.9989324294 ) 01 April 2016
Certain rules are enjoined by Hindu Law to prevent incestuous marriage. They have been modified by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to some extent:
According to Smritis (e.g. Yajnavalkya Smriti) 7 degrees on the father’s side and 5 degrees on the mother’s side are prohibited degrees of relationship for a marriage. The Mitakshara, Vijnanesvara’s commentary on Yajnavalkya Smriti, explains how these degrees are to be counted. If the relationship of A is being traced A himself is counted as one degree weather in a line of ascent or in a line of descent. If there is a common ancestor the line diverges from him.
In such a case the common ancestor is also to be counted as one degree. Thus as regards collateral relations, we have to trace relationship through the common ancestor and he is to be reckoned as one degree. Balambhatti, the commentary on the Mitakshara, has elucidated the matter further.
Two collaterals can be treated as Sapindas only if with respect to each of them the common ancestor is within the limits of 7 or 5 degrees, ascent being traced, as the case may be, through the male or female line.
Custom has engrafted upon this rule some exceptions. The great sage Baudhayana recognised that in Southern India maternal uncle’s daughter and paternal aunt’s daughter are treated as eligible for marriage. This is based upon local custom or Desa Achara.
In the Vedas there is a text which means “Oh Indra! We offer to you the fat seasoned in the ghee that is thy portion, as the maternal uncle’s daughter or paternal aunt’s daughter is one’s lot in marriage”. This is cited in support of the validity of such marriages. But the better basis for such marriages is local custom. In Andhra Pradesh sister’s daughter is regarded by custom as eligible for marriage.
In this way to a certain extent the rule as to degrees of prohibited relationship has been departed from by customary practices. A custom obnoxious to public policy and morality may be rejected. Thus in Balusami v. Balakrishna, AIR 1957 Mad. 97, a custom to marry daughter’s daughter was held to be invalid.
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 01 April 2016
praveen kumar m 02 April 2016