Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sespuri Vs. Dwarka Prasad

Sespuri vs Dwarka Prasad

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jul 01, 1912
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/476717

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Civil

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Hindu Law - Marriage between a Thakur and a Brahman woman, whether illegal--Issue born of such marriage, whether legitimate--Nihang Goshain--Custom as to marriage. - - The present case is a very much stronger one, because even those ancient writers who have hesitated altogether to condemn a marriage between a man ...

Key legal issue
Civil

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sespuri

Respondent

Dwarka Prasad

Legal References

Cases Referred
Padam Kumari v. Surai Kumari
Reported In
16Ind.Cas.222

Excerpt

hindu law - marriage between a thakur and a brahman woman, whether illegal--issue born of such marriage, whether legitimate--nihang goshain--custom as to marriage. - - the present case is a very much stronger one, because even those ancient writers who have hesitated altogether to condemn a marriage between a man of higher caste and a woman of lower caste, have been clear in their condemnation of such a union as the present, where the position is reversed. i fail to see, therefore, how the fact that the plaintiff's father and mother violated one rule, which was binding upon them as members of a religious order, can excuse or validate their union in defiance of a general principle of hindu law......one, because even those ancient writers who have hesitated altogether to condemn a marriage between a man of higher caste and a woman of lower caste, have been clear in their condemnation of such a union as the present, where the position is reversed. it is contended, however, that there is one circumstance which takes the present case outside of the ordinary rule. the plaintiff's father sidha had joined a religious order. he had become a nihang goshain, and the plaintiff's mother also had joined that order before their union. this might possibly help the plaintiff if he could prove a valid custom binding upon all nihang goshains, which recognises as lawful a marriage between any man and any woman belonging to that order whatever their previous position in the world might be. the direct contrary is the case. the nihang goshaim are a celibate order, who are not supposed to marry at all. i fail to see, therefore, how the fact that the plaintiff's father and mother violated one rule, which was binding upon them as members of a religious order, can excuse or validate their union in defiance of a general principle of hindu law. i concur in the finding of the lower appellate court against the legitimacy of the plaintiff and dismiss the appeal with costs including fees on the higher scale.

Full Judgment

Piggott, J.

1. The only question in issue in this case is whether the plaintiff, Sespuri, is the legitimate son of one Sidha. Sidha was a Thakur by caste and he contracted a union with a wdman of the Brahman caste, from which the plaintiff Sespuri is alleged to have been born. Such union is prima facie forbidden by the Hindu Law. It can-not amount to a legal marriage, and its offspring cannot be said to be legitimate issue. In the case of Padam Kumari v. Surai Kumari 18 A. 458 : A.W.N. (1906) 83 : 3 A.L.J. 209 a Bench of this Court held that a marriage between a man of the Brahman caste and a woman, who was a Chhattrior Rajput by caste, is not lawful in these Provinces and the issue of such marriage is not legitimate. The present case is a very much stronger one, because even those ancient writers who have hesitated altogether to condemn a marriage between a man of higher caste and a woman of lower caste, have been clear in their condemnation of such a union as the present, where the position is reversed. It is contended, however, that there is one circumstance which takes the present case outside of the ordinary rule. The plaintiff's father Sidha had joined a religious order. He had become a Nihang Goshain, and the plaintiff's mother also had joined that order before their union. This might possibly help the plaintiff if he could prove a valid custom binding upon all Nihang Goshains, which recognises as lawful a marriage between any man and any woman belonging to that order whatever their previous position in the world might be. The direct contrary is the case. The Nihang Goshaim are a celibate order, who are not supposed to marry at all. I fail to see, therefore, how the fact that the plaintiff's father and mother violated one rule, which was binding upon them as members of a religious order, can excuse or validate their union in defiance of a general principle of Hindu Law. I concur in the finding of the lower Appellate Court against the legitimacy of the plaintiff and dismiss the appeal with costs including fees on the higher scale.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial