THIRUMALAI Vs. GOMATHI AMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. Defendants 1 and 2 in O.S.No.243 of 1979, on the file of District Munsif's Court, Kovilpatti, are the appellants. Plaintiff is first respondent.

(2.) REFERENCE to parties, in this judgment will be according to their rank in the suit.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for appellant argued that Ex.A-1 is a void transaction ab initioand the court cannot recognise the title of plaintiff since she claims right over the property only on the basis of the void transaction. The reason for such an argument is that plaintiff was 17 years old and a minor when the document was accepted. LEARNED counsel submitted that it goes against the provisions of the Child Marriage Restraint Act. The further argument is that the deed itself was executed in consideration of the child marriage and when the object is unlawful. the court may not recognise it. If title is declared on the basis of the document, it amounts to recognition of title obtained in fulfilment of an unlawful object and which is also against public policy. It was argued that under Sec.23 of the Contract Act, the document shall not be considered for any purpose. It was further argued that even if the plaintiff gets any right, the court will not protect such right, and in such cases the court will only allow the parties to maintain status quo.