Marriage

1. Hindu Law
MARRIAGE

3. NATURE OF HINDU MARRIAGE
 Marriage, according to the Hindu Law, is a
body for the performance of religious duties.
It is deemed as a holy union in Hindu Law. It
is also considered to be an union of flesh and
flesh and blood and blood. It is a religious
sacrament and not a civil contract.

4. Forms of Marriage
The ancient Hindu law recognized eight forms of marriage of
which four approved and four unapproved forms.

8. 1. Brahma Vivah
Brahma vivah is considered the best marriage. In this the boy
and girl belonging to good families and the same varna get
married. The boy should have completed his Brahmacharya
Ashram (studenthood). There is no dowry involved and the
girl enters the boy’s house with two sets of clothes and some
ornaments. In this marriage, the boy’s family approaches the
girl’s family. “Kanyadaan”, which is the handing of the bride
by her father to the groom, is an important ritual of the Brahma
Vivah.

10. 2. Daiva Vivah
 In this type of Hindu marriage, the girl’s
family looks for a groom. If a girl has not
been able to get a suitable husband for a
period of time, her family look to marry her
to a priest who officiates over sacrifices

12. 3. Arsha Vivah
 Here the groom gives a gift (a cow and a pair
of bulls) to the girl’s family. This usually takes
place when the girl’s parents can not afford to
meet the expense of the marriage. This is not
considered an ideal marriage because there is a
monetary consideration involved in this
wedding.

14. 4. Prajapatya Vivah
 Somewhat similar to the Brahma Vivah, except in this
case the girl’s family looks for a groom and the ritual of
Kanyadaan is not followed. Instead of “Kanyadaan”, the
bride’s father hands over protection of his daughter to
the groom during the “Panigrahan” ritual. The actual
wedding takes place after “Panigrahan”

17. 5. Gandharva Vivah
This is a love marriage, where the
bride and groom marry of their own
free will. Usually the consent of the
parents is not taken or is not available
because either or both parents are
against the marriage.

19. 6. Asura Vivah
 Somewhat similar to the “Arsha Vivah”
where the groom gives presents to the
bride’s family in order to get their approval
for the marriage. Usually the groom is not of
the same stature as the bride.

21. 7. Rakshasa Vivah
 In this Hindu wedding, the bride is ready to
marry groom, but the bride’s family is
against the marriage. In such cases, if the
groom’s family forcibly takes away the
bride, it is a “Rakshasa Vivah”.

23. 8. Paishacha Vivah
 This type of marriage is not allowed. In this
marriage, a girl, who is not in her senses (she may
not be of sound mind or intoxicated or drugged,
etc) is forcibly married off. The girl has not
consented to this marriage.

25. Essentials of Valid Hindu Marriage
Under the Hindu Marriage Act ,1955 certain conditions are necessary
for a valid Hindu Marriage. Those conditions have been laid own in
Sec 5 and 7of the Act. Section reads as follows.
By virtue of section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955, a marriage will
be valid only if both the parties to the marriage are Hindus. If one of
the parties to the marriage is a Christian or Muslim, the marriage will
not be a valid Hindu marriage

26. A marriage may be solemnized between any
two Hindus, if the following conditions are
fulfilled, namely
1.neither party has a spouse living at the time of the
marriage;
2. at the time of marriage, neither party:
a) is incapable of giving a valid consent to it in consequence
of unsoundness of mind; or
b) though capable of giving a valid consent, has been
suffering from mental disorder of such a kind or to such
an extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of
children; or

27. A marriage may be solemnized
between any two Hindus, if the
following conditions are fulfilled,
namely
c) has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity or epilepsy
3. the bridegroom has completed the age of 21 years and the bride the age
of 18 years at the time of marriage;
4. the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless
the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage
between the two
5.the parties are not Sapinda of each other, unless the custom or usage
governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

28. 1. Monogamy (Sec 5 Clause (1))
This provision Prohibits bigamy .The marriage should be
monogamous. Under the Hindu Law a person can validly
marry if he or she is either unmarried or divorced or a widow
or a widower. If at the time of the performance of the
marriage rites and ceremonies either party has a spouse living
and the earlier marriage had not already been set aside, the
later marriage is void. A bigamous marriage is null and void
and is made punishable.

29.  Sarla Mudgal vs. Union of India
 The Court held that if a Hindu converts to
Muslim and then have a second marriage, he
can not do so, irrespective of the fact that
polygamy is allowed in Islamic Law.

30. Neeraja Saraph v Jayant Saraph (1994) 6 SCC 46
 The Supreme Court gave some important obiter observations in this case:
 No marriage between a NRI and an Indian woman which has taken place in
India may be annulled by a foreign court.
 Provision may be made for adequate alimony to the wife in the property of
the husband both in India and abroad.
 The decree granted by Indian courts may be made executable in foreign
courts both on principle of comity and by entering into reciprocal
agreements like Section 44-A of the Civil Procedure Code which makes a
foreign decree executable as it would have been a decree passed by that
court.

31. 2.Mental Capacity (Sec 5 Clause (2))
The parties to the marriage should not suffer from
unsoundness of mind, mental disorder or insanity. In
all the cases given in sec 5 clause (2) the party is
regarded as not having the mental capacity to
solemnize the marriage. So if a party who solemnize
the marriage is suffer from unsoundness of mind,
mental disorder or insanity, the marriage is voidable
at the opinion of the other party.

32. Lata Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2006 (6) SCALE
583
 Noting that there was no bar to inter-caste marriage
under the Hindu Marriage Act, a Division Bench of the
Supreme Court comprising of Justice Ashok Bhan and
Justice Markandey Katju observed that since there was
no dispute about the petitioner being a major, “she was
free to marry anyone she likes or live with anyone she
likes“.

33. 3.Age to the parties (Sec 5 Clause
(3))
At the time of marriage the bridegroom has completed the
age of 21 years and the bride the age of 18 years .

34. Degrees of Prohibited
relationship (Sec 5 Clause (4)
The parties to the marriage should not come within the degrees of prohibited
relationship. Two persons are said to be within the degrees of prohibited
relationship
i) if one is a lineal ascendant of the other; or
ii) if one was the wife or husband of lineal ascendant or descendant of the other; or
iii) if one was the wife of the brother or of the father’s or mother’s brother or of the
grandfathers or grandmothers brother of the other; or
iv) if the two are brother and sister, uncle and niece, aunt and nephew, or children of
brother and sister or of two brothers or of two sisters.

35.  If a marriage falls into one of the prohibited relationship
degrees, it is void by Section 11 of the Act and
punishable by simple imprisonment for up to one month,
a fine, or both under Section 18(b) of the same Act.
In Kamani Devi v. Kameshwar Singh (1945), it was held
that even if the marriage was unlawful because it was
within the prohibited degree, the wife’s maintenance
duty would continue.

36.  It was decided in Balusami Reddiar v. Balakrishna Reddiar (1956)
that the tradition could not be contrary to public policy or
morals. Further, the Punjab and Haryana High Court decided
in Shakuntala Devi v. Amar Nath (1982) that two people can
marry within the prohibited relationship if there is proof of
established tradition, which must be very old and beyond human
memory.

37. Arunkumar v. Inspector General of
Registration
 The Madras High Court upheld the fundamental rights available
to a transgender female and thereby included a transgender
female within the ambit of a “bride” that has been included in
Section 5(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Justice G.R.
Swaminathan opined that a marriage between a man, and a
transwoman, both being Hindu will be considered as a valid
marriage under Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This
decision was made by the Court taking into consideration the
importance of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 21 and 25 of the Indian
Constitution.

40. 5.Sapinda Relationship (Sec 5
Clause (5))
he parties to the marriage should not be related to each other as Sapindas.
A marriage between sapindas is void.
Under Section 3(f) (i) “Sapinda relationship” with reference to any
person extends as far as the third generation (inclusive) in the line of
ascent through the mother, and the fifth (inclusive) in the line of ascent
through the father, the line being traced upwards in each case from the
person concerned, who is to be counted as the first generation.
(ii) Two persons are said to be “sapindas” of each other if one is a lineal
ascendant of the other within the limits of "Sapinda" relationship, or if
they have a common lineal ascendant who is within the limits of
"Sapinda" relationship with reference to each of them

41.  According to Section 3 of the Act, the custom must be legal. It was held in the
case of Harihar Prasad v. Balmiki Prasad (1974) that a valid custom must be
established by clear and unambiguous evidence. It is only through such
evidence that the courts can be assured of their existence, and they must meet
the conditions of antiquity and certainty for legal recognition. Sapinda
marriages are punishable under Section 18(b) of the Act of 1955 by simple
imprisonment for up to one month, a fine of up to one thousand rupees, or both.
 The rules that apply for determining a sapinda relationship are provided
hereunder:
 The sapinda relationship is always tracked upward, in the ascent direction,

42.  In the case of Arun Laxmanrao Navalkar v. Meena Arun Navalkar (2006), the Bombay High
Court had observed that Section 5(v) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 does not only
declare that the marriage of the persons in a sapinda relationship is null and invalid but
also specifies that it is only valid if there is a custom to the contrary. Because of this
phraseology, the learned single Judge has held that the party proposing such a
relationship must not only show such a relationship but also show that there was no
custom to the contrary because the said subsection only prohibits the marriage if such a
custom does not exist within the community. If the subsection is viewed this way, the onus
may only be discharged by stating the negative reality that no such custom exists within
the parties’ community.

43.  It was decided in Balusami Reddiar v. Balakrishna
Reddiar (1956) that the tradition could not be contrary to
public policy or morals. Further, the Punjab and Haryana
High Court decided in Shakuntala Devi v. Amar Nath (1982)
that two people can marry within the prohibited relationship
if there is proof of established tradition, which must be very
old and beyond human memory.

44. 6. Guardianship in Marriage
(Omitted by Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976.

45. 7. Ceremonies for a Hindu marriage
(1) A Hindu marriage may be solemnized in
accordance with the customary rites and ceremonies
of either party thereto.
(2) Where such rites and ceremonies include the
saptapadi (that is, the taking of seven steps by the
bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred
fire), the marriage becomes complete and binding
when the seventh step is taken.

46.  Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha
 Considering Sec 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the
marriage performed in absence of customary rites and
ceremonies of either parties to marriage is not valid. And
Mere intention of the parties to live together as husband
and wife is not enough. Further, there is no scope to
include a woman not lawfully married within the
expression of ‘wife’ in Section 125 of the Code should be
interpreted to mean only a legally wedded wife.

47. In Shanti Dev Barma v. Kanchanprawa,21the Supreme Court held
that mere wearing of mangalsutra or sindoor on the forehead does
not constitute a marriage that is accepted as legal.

48. Payal Sharma v. NariNiketan (2001
SCC online All 332
 There is no legal definition for the term Live-in-relationship.
“Live-in-relationship is a living arrangement in which an
unmarried couple lives together in a long-term relationship that
resembles a marriage”. There is no valid marriage between the
parties, in the sense of solemnisation of a marriage under
section.7 of the ‘Hindu Marriage Act’. 24 The Bench
consisting of Justice M.Katju and Justice R.B.Misra observed
that “In our opinion, a man and a woman, even without getting
married, can live together if they wish to. It may be immoral
before society, but it is not illegal. There is a difference
between law and morality”

49. Virendra Singh Pai v. Kashibai
 The Court held that “Where parties are constantly,
continuously and openly living as husband and wife and
had children, friends and relatives recognised them as
husband and wife; it raises a presumption of a valid
marriage. However, it has to be shown that requisite
conditions of a valid marriage are satisfied”.

50. 8. Registration of Hindu Marriages
(1) For the purpose of facilitating the proof of Hindu marriages,
the State Government may make rules providing that the
parties to any such marriage may have the particulars relating
to their marriage entered in such manner and subject to such
condition as may be prescribed in a Hindu Marriage Register
kept for the purpose.

51. 8. Registration of Hindu Marriages
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),
the State Government may, if it is of opinion that it is
necessary or expedient so to do, provide that the
entering of the particulars referred to in sub-section (1)
shall be compulsory in the State or in any part thereof,
whether in all cases or in such cases as may be specified
and where any such direction has been issued, and
person contravening any rule made in this behalf shall be
punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five
rupees.

52. 8. Registration of Hindu Marriages
(3) All rules made under this section shall be laid before the
State Legislature, as soon as may be, after they are made.
(4) The Hindu Marriage Register shall at all reasonable times
be open for inspection, and shall be admissible as
evidence of the statements therein contained and
certified extracts there from shall, on application, be
given by the Registrar on payment to him of the
prescribed fee.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the
validity of any Hindu marriage shall in no way be affected
by the omission to make the entry.

53.  Seema v. Ashwani Kumar, AIR 2006 S.C 1158
 The Supreme Court in this case directed the State
Governments and the Central Government that marriages
of all persons who are citizens of India belonging to
various religious denominations should be made
compulsorily registerable in their respective States where
such marriages are solemnized. The Bench, comprising of
Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice S.H. Kapadia also
directed that as and when the Central Government enacts
a comprehensive statute, the same shall be placed before
that Court for scrutiny.

54. Restitution of Conjugal rights and
judicial separation
Each spouse is entitled to comfort consortium of the other.
So after the solemnization of the marriage if either of the
spouses without reasonable excuse withdraws himself or
herself from the society of the other then aggrieved party
has a legal right to file a petition in the matrimonial court
for restitution of conjugal rights and such decree may be
passed, but cannot be enforced under Indian Law.
Provisions are available to seek the passing of a divorce
decree if the decree for restitution for marital rights is not
adhered to, in favor of the aggrieved party.

55.  Saroj Rani v Sudarshan Kumar
 In this case the constitutionality of Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was
challenged. Petition was filed by the wife for a restitution of conjugal rights
under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955. Her husband consenting to
the passing of a decree for the same was passed.
 After a period of 1-year husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the
Hindu Marriage Act,1955 against the appellant for divorce on the ground
that though one year had elapsed from the date of passing the decree for
restitution of conjugal rights as no actual cohabitation had taken place
between the parties. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
Section 9 by saying that it serves a social purpose as an aid to the
prevention of break-up of the marriage.

56.  Balveer Singh v. Harjeet Kaur (Uttarakhand High Court)
 While deciding this issue, the High Court referred to the impugned
provisions and made the following key observations in the case:
 That on a simple reading of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, it has
altogether a different purpose. The purpose of Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 is to meet a contingency.
 Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 13-A of Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 are framed to meet a separate set of contingencies.
 If Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is either decreed or dismissed, it
will not take away a right of a party to file Section 13-A of Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage at any subsequent stage.

57. T. Sareetha v. Venkata Subbaiah
 The case was decided by the Andhra Pradesh High Court which observed that
Section 9 of the said Act was a savage and barbarous remedy violating the
right to privacy and human dignity and equality guaranteed by Article 14 & 21
of the Constitution.

Hence, Sec 9 was declared to be constitutionally void for abridging rights
guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. According to the learned Judge, a
decree for restitution of conjugal rights deprived of her choice as and when
and by whom the various parts of her body should be allowed to be sensed.
The court relied on the Scarman Commission’s Report in England that
recommended its abolition.

58. Harvinder Kaur v. Harmander
Singh1983
 It was held that sec 9 was not violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution, since the leading idea behind Sec 9 was to preserve the
marriage. The remedy of restitution was aimed at cohabitation and
consortium and not merely at sexual intercourse.

59. Vuyyuru Pothuraju v. Radha1965
 In the instant case, there was a pre- nuptial agreement between the husband and
wife that after marriage, the husband would live with wife at her foster- father’s
house. Subsequently he was ill-treated there and returned to his village and
requested his wife to come over to him. On her refusal, he initiated a suit of
restitution of conjugal rights. The Court held that pre- nuptial agreement was
unenforceable and subsequently allowed the petition.
As a general principle, any agreement, be it under Hindu law or Muslim law,
between husband wife to live separately, is considered to be void for being
contrary to public policy.

60. Mirchumal v. Devi Bai
 This case primarily deals with the effect of husband and wife serving in
different places. In this case, the husband was in service near Ajmer and
the wife worked in Adipur. On the wife’s refusal to quit her job, the
husband moved the petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

The court held that if there is no refusal on the part of the wife to allow
access to her husband and no reluctance on her part in going to her
husband, then the mere refusal on her part to resign her job is sufficient
ground for the husband to seek relief for restitution of conjugal rights.
Hence the petition was dismissed.

61. Burden of Proof

Restitution of conjugal rights can be claimed when the other party to the
marriage has withdrawn from conjugal society without and reasonable care.
It is for the party who has withdrawn from conjugal society to show valid
excuse. This excuse should be reasonable and convincing.

The facts that the aged parents of the husband are residing with him or that
the wife has to look after her deceased father’s lands are not reasonable
excuses. However a wife would be justified in leaving her husband is she is
forced to non-vegetarian food or drinking alcohol against her wishes.

62. 10. Judicial separation.-
Either party to a marriage, whether solemnized before or after the commencement of
this Act, may present a petition praying for a decree for judicial separation on
any of the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of Section 13, and in the case of a
wife also on any of the grounds might have been presented.
(2) Where a decree for judicial separation has been passed, it shall no longer be
obligatory for the petitioner to cohabit with the respondent, but the court may,
on the application by petition of either party and on being satisfied of the truth
of the statement made in such petition, rescind the decree if it considers it just
and reasonable to do so.

63.  Adultery: If other spouse had a voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than his
or her spouse after solemnization of marriage.
 Cruelty: If after solemnization of marriage, one of the spouse treats the other with cruelty.
 Desertion: If the other party has deserted the spouse for a continuous period of 2 years
without any reasonable ground immediately preceding the presentation of the petition.
 Conversion: If one of the spouses has ceased to be a Hindu.
 Insanity: If the other party is of unsound mind or has been suffering continuously from
mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot live with the
other party.
 Leprosy: If the other party has been suffering from a virulent and incurable form of leprosy.
 Venereal disease: If the other party has been suffering from venereal disease in a
communicable form.
 Renounced the world: If the other spouse has renounced the world by entering any
religious order.
 Has not been heard alive for seven years.

64. Additional grounds for the wife to
claim justice
 Bigamy [Section 13(2)(i)]- It means if the
husband is remarried while he is already
married, both of his wives have a right to
claim the petition for judicial separation with
a condition that, the other wife is also alive at
the same time of filing.

65.  Rape, sodomy or Bestiality [Section
13(2)(ii)]- The wife has a right to file a
petition for judicial separation if her
husband is guilty of charges like rape,
bestiality or sodomy after the marriage.

66.  Repudiation of marriage/A option of
puberty [Section 13(2)(iv)]- If a girl’s
marriage happened before attending 15
years of age, then, she has a right to claim
judicial separation.

67. Filing petition for Judicial Separation
 Any spouse who is hurt by another spouse, can file a petition for Judicial
Separation in a District Court under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 and the following should be satisfied:
1. The marriage between the husband and wife should be celebrated
properly under Hindu marriage Act.
II. The respondent should be settled in the jurisdiction of the court where
the petitioner filed the petition.
III. The husband and wife lived together for a particular period of time
before the filing of petition.

68. Every petition should according to Order VII Rule 1 of the Civil
Procedure Code, 1973 must contain:
 The date and place of marriage.
 The person should be a Hindu, by his/her affidavit.
 Name, status, address of both the parties
 Name, DOB and gender of children(if any).
 Details of litigation filed before filing the decree for judicial
separation or divorce.
 For the judicial separation, the evidence should prove the grounds.

69. Revathi Vs. Union of India and Ors
 – In this case, the Court held that Section 497 of IPC is prepared like, a
husband can not prosecute the wife for defiling the sanctity of the
married tie by the charge of adultery. The law does not permit the
husband of the offending wife to prosecute his wife and the wife also
has not permitted to prosecute the offending husband for being
disloyal to her. Therefore, both the husband and wife have no right to
strike each other with the weapon of criminal law.

70. Shyamsundar Vs. Santadevi
 – in this case after the marriage, the wife was badly harmed by her
husband’s relatives and the husband also stood lazily, taking no steps to
protect his wife.

71. Guru Bachan Kaur Vs. Preetam
Singh
 the husband filed a petition for divorce after 7 years of declared desertion
and never understood the problems of the wife who was also a working
woman. But the wife was willing to live with her husband at her house in
the place of her service.
The High Court held that there is nothing like mutual desertion. One party has
to be guilty in desertion.

72. Durga Prasad Rao Vs. Sudharshan
Swami
 it was observed that in every conversion case, formal
rejection of religion or operation of the sacrificial
ceremony is not essential. Therefore, in the case of
conversion, the question of fact arose.

73. Anima Roy Vs. Prabadh Mohan Ray
(AIR 1969)
 in this case, the respondent was found suffering from an
abnormal disease after 2 months of marriage. The doctor
who checked the respondent also could not find the
particular time of starting the illness. Therefore, it was
held that disease was not proved at the time of marriage.

75. 11. Nullity of marriage and divorce-
Void marriages
 Any marriage solemnized after the commencement of this Act
shall be null and void and may, on a petition presented by
either party thereto, against the other party be so declared by a
decree of nullity if it contravenes any one of the conditions
specified in clauses (i), (iv) and (v), Section 5.

76. clauses (i), (iv) and (v), Section 5.
(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the
marriage
(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of
prohibited relationship unless the custom or usage
governing each of them permits of a marriage
between the two
(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless
the custom or usage governing each of them
permits of a marriage between the two;

77.  Sh. Jitender Kumar Sharma vs State & Another
 In this case, the marriage took place between two minor parties who had
fallen in love and eloped after their marriage. The girl’s father contended
before the court that the marriage between his daughter, and the
petitioner, Jitender Kumar was invalid as it infringed Section 5(iii) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Court, while pointing out that Section 5(iii)
is neither ground for void marriage nor for a voidable marriage, opined
that the minor couple is free to live together without any compulsion from
the respective families.

79. 12. Voidable Marriages
(a)that the marriage has not been consummated owing to the impotency of
the respondent; or
(b) that the marriage is in contravention of the condition specified in clause
(ii) of Section 5 at the time of the marriage, neither party,- (a) is
incapable of giving a valid consent of it in consequence of
unsoundness of mind; or
(b) though capable of giving a valid consent has been suffering from
mental disorder of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfit for
marriage and the procreation of children; or; or
(c) that the consent of the petitioner, or where the consent of the guardian in
marriage of the petitioner was required under Section 5 as it stood
immediately before the commencement of the Child Marriage
Restraint (Amendment) Act, 1978, the consent of such guardian was
obtained by force or by fraud as to the nature of the ceremony or as
to any material fact or circumstance concerning the respondent; or

80. 12. Voidable Marriages
(d) that the respondent was at the time of the marriage pregnant by some
person other than the petitioner.
2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no petition for
annulling a marriage-
(a)on the ground specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1) shall be
entertained if-
(i) the petition is presented more than one year after the force had ceased
to operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been discovered ; or
(ii) the petitioner has, with his or her full consent, lived with the other
party to the marriage as husband or wife after the force had ceased to
operate or, as the case may be, the fraud had been discovered;

81. 12. Voidable Marriages
(b) on the ground specified in clause (d) of sub-section (1) shall be
entertained unless the court is satisfied-
(i) that the petitioner was at the time of the marriage ignorant of
the facts alleged;
(ii) that proceedings have been instituted in the case of a marriage
solemnized before the commencement of this Act within one
year of such commencement and in the case of marriages
solemnized after such commencement within one year from the
date of the marriage; and
(iii) that marital intercourse with the consent of the petitioner has
not taken place since the discovery by the petitioner of the
existence of the said ground.

82. Smt. Yamunabai v. Anant Rao
 in this particular case the Supreme Court observed
that second wife is not a wife because second
marriage is void-ab-initio and in void marriage
wife cannot claim maintenance which is provided
under Section 125 of CrPC (Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973).

83. Smt. Sakuntala Devi v. Amar Nath
 in this case it was observed by the Court that if there is custom existing
which is allowing marriage between the parties within the degree of
prohibited relationship then the custom must fulfill the requirements of
a valid custom and the existing custom must be reasonable it should not
be against the public policy.

84. Void Marriage Voidable Marriage
A wife does not have the right to claim
maintenance in the void marriage.
A wife has the right to claim maintenance in
in the voidable marriage.
In a void marriage, the parties do not have
the status of husband and wife.
Husband and wife have the status in the
voidable marriage.
In a void marriage, no decree of nullity is
required.
In a voidable marriage decree of nullity is
required.
A void marriage is none in the eyes of law.
A voidable marriage is to be declared
voidable by a competent court.
The children in a void marriage are treated
as legitimate.
The children in a voidable marriage are
treated as illegitimate but this distinction is
deleted by the Supreme Court and said a
child cannot be said termed as illegitimate.
Therefor they are legitimate.