 | This article includes a list of references, related reading, or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations .(June 2017) |
Gullipilli Sowria Raj v. Bandaru Pavani is an Indian Supreme Court ruling in a lawsuit involving the legality of the marriage to a Hindu woman of a Christian man, Raj, who had falsely represented himself as Hindu. The court ruled that the marriage was not valid.
Early in December 2008, a Christian man had married Hindu woman Pavani by pretending to be a Hindu, and tried to blackmail her parents for money or other assets in the form of gold. He locked her in a room and didn't allow her to talk to her parents.
Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) makes it clear that marriage may be solemnised between any two people if the conditions (such as age eligibility) contained in the said section were fulfilled.
Allegedly, Raj had misinformed everyone about his social status and religion and Pavani filed a case upon learning the truth.
The High Court upheld her plea and said the marriage was void as the HMA postulated only between Hindus; following this, Raj, filed a special leave petition (SLP) in the apex court. He claimed that the Hindu HMA does not preclude a Hindu from marrying a person of another faith.
However counsel argued that each religious community has its own form which excludes members of other communities. Christian and a non-Christian can marry, but only under the provisions.
Dismissing the man's appeal, the apex court upheld the High Court’s view that the marriage was not valid under the HMA, specifically pointing to the fact that Section 5 of the HMA makes it clear that the marital union may be solemnized between any two Hindus only if the conditions in the said Section were fulfilled.
Marriage in the Catholic Church, also known as holy matrimony, is the "covenant by which a man and woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring", and which "has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized". Catholic matrimonial law, based on Roman law regarding its focus on marriage as a free mutual agreement or contract, became the basis for the marriage law of all European countries, at least up to the Reformation.
Ne Temere was a decree issued in 1907 by the Roman Catholic Congregation of the Council regulating the canon law of the Church regarding marriage for practising Catholics. It is named for its opening words, which literally mean "lest rashly" in Latin.
Proposition 22 was a law enacted by California voters in March 2000 stating that marriage was between one man and one woman. In November 2008, Proposition 8 was also passed by voters, again only allowing marriage between one man and one woman.
In Islamic law (sharia), marriage is a legal and social contract between two individuals. Marriage is an act of Islam and is strongly recommended. Polygyny is permitted in Islam under some conditions, but polyandry is forbidden.
Interfaith marriage, sometimes called interreligious marriage or "mixed marriage", is marriage between spouses professing different religions. Although interfaith marriages are often established as civil marriages, in some instances they may be established as a religious marriage. This depends on religious doctrine of each of the two parties' religions; some prohibit interfaith marriage, and among others there are varying degrees of permissibility.
Conflict of marriage laws is the conflict of laws with respect to marriage in different jurisdictions. When marriage-related issues arise between couples with diverse backgrounds, questions as to which legal systems and norms should be applied to the relationship naturally follow with various potentially applicable systems frequently conflicting with one another.
The Hindu marriage is the most important of all the samskaras, the rites of passage described in the Dharmashastra texts.
This article summarizes the same-sex marriage laws of states in the United States. Via the case Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States legalized same-sex marriage in a decision that applies nationwide, with the exception of American Samoa and sovereign tribal nations.
Pavani may refer to:
The matrimonial law of Singapore categorises marriages contracted in Singapore into two categories: civil marriages and Muslim marriages. The Registry of Marriage (ROM) administers civil marriages in accordance to the Women's Charter, while the Registry of Muslim Marriages (ROMM) administers Muslim marriages in accordance to the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA). All marriages performed in Singapore must be registered with the relevant registry in order to be legally valid.
Modern Hindu law is one of the personal law systems of India along with similar systems for Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, and Christians. This Hindu Personal Law or modern Hindu law is an extension of the Anglo-Hindu Law developed during the British colonial period in India, which is in turn related to the less well-defined tradition of Classical Hindu Law. The time frame of this period of Hindu law begins with the formal independence of India from Great Britain on August 14, 1947, and extends up until the present. While modern Hindu law is heralded for its inherent respect for religious doctrines, many still complain that discrimination still pervades the legal system, though efforts to modernize and increase the legal rights of the marginalized have been made.
The Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted in 1955 which was passed on 18th of May. Three other important acts were also enacted as part of the Hindu Code Bills during this time: the Hindu Succession Act (1956), the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act (1956), the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (1956).
India provides some legal recognition of homosexual partnerships as live-in relationships. It does not provide for legal marriages, common law marriages, guardianship, civil unions, or issue partnership certificates.
The Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriage in the states and most territories did not legalize same-sex marriage on Indian reservations. In the United States, Congress has legal authority over tribal reservations. Thus, unless Congress passes a law regarding same-sex marriage that is applicable to tribal governments, federally recognized American Indian tribes have the legal right to form their own marriage laws. As such, the individual laws of the various United States federally recognized Native American tribes may set limits on same-sex marriage under their jurisdictions. At least ten reservations specifically prohibit same-sex marriage and do not recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions; these reservations, alongside American Samoa, remain the only parts of the United States to enforce explicit bans on same-sex couples marrying.
A Gandharva marriage is one of the eight classical types of Hindu marriage. This ancient marriage tradition from the Indian subcontinent was based on consensual acceptance between two people, with no rituals, witnesses or family participation. The marriage of Dushyanta and Shakuntala was a historically celebrated example of this class of marriage.
During the British Colonial regime, the position of a non-Buddhist husband and Myanmar Buddhist wife was very unfavorable. While there is no provision in the Dhammathats that a Buddhist woman cannot marry another religious man, in this period, the Buddhist woman who married a non-Buddhist man almost lost her rights to divorce, inheritance, succession and their child's legal status. Almost all matters of divorce, inheritance, succession, partition and guardianship of children were decided by a foreign judge.
Suresh Kumar Koushal &Anr. v. NAZ Foundation &Ors.(2013) is a case in which a 2 judge Supreme Court bench consisting of G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadhaya overturned the Delhi High Court case Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and reinstated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The Supreme Court of India decided to revisit this judgement after several curative petitions were filed against it, in 2017. Thereby in 2018, Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, a 5 judge bench of the Supreme Court overturned this judgement, decriminalizing homosexuality. Portions of Section 377 relating to sex with minors, non-consensual sexual acts such as rape, and bestiality remain in force.
All the Muslims in India are governed by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. This law deals with marriage, succession, inheritance and charities among Muslims. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 deals with the circumstances in which Muslim women can obtain divorce and rights of Muslim women who have been divorced by their husbands and to provide for related matters. These laws are not applicable in the state of Goa, where Goa civil code is applicable for all persons irrespective of religion. These laws are not applicable to Indians, including Muslims, who married under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Arun Kumar &Anr. versus Inspector General of Registration&Ors. (2019) is a decision of the Madras High Court which recognised trans woman as a "bride" within the meaning of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 and prohibited genital-normalizing surgery for intersex infants and children except on life-threatening situations.
Marriage in Indonesia is carried out by one sacred recipient man and one woman with the intention of formalizing the marriage bond according to religious norms, legal norms, and social norms.