... 1 ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA. FIRST APPEAL NO.9 OF 2004 Mrs. Swaroopa Prakash Vaigankar, Nee Kalpana Gunaji Rane, r/o House No.64, Patto, Ribandar, Tiswadi Taluka, Goa. ... Appellant v e r s u s 1. Mrs. Deepa Prakash Naik, widow of Prakash Naik Vaigankar, major of age, r/o House No.138, D.N., r/o Basu Dipu Naik, Rua de Maria, Sancoale, Mormugao, Goa. 2. Kalidas Prakash Vaigankar, son of late Prakash Naik Vaigankar major of age, student, through his next friend, Mrs. Deepa Prakash Naik, D.N., r/o Basu Dipu Naik, Rua de Maria, Sancoale, Mormugao, Goa. 3. Pradeep R. Vaigankar, r/o House No.64, Patto, Ribandar, Tiswadi Taluka, Goa. ... 2 ... 4. Life Insurance Corporation of India, through its Vasco-da-Gama branch, with office at Nitin Chambers, Swatantra Path, House no. not known, Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. 5. The Board of Trustee of the Port of Murmugao, through its Secretary, Mormugao Harbour, Mormugao, Goa. 6. Syndicate Bank, Ribandar Branch, through its Branch Manager, Ribandar, Tiswadi Taluka, Goa. ... Respondents Ms. R. Kamat, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.U. G. Shetye, Advocate for the Respondent no.1 absent. Ms. S. S. Naik, Advocate for the respondent no.2 absent. Mr. Y. V. Nadkarni, Advocate for the respondent no.5. None for the other respondents. ... 3 ... CORAM: A. P. LAVANDE, J. JUDGMENT RESERVED: 14.11.2008. JUDGMENT DELIVERED: 02.12.2008 JUDGMENT: By this appeal the appellant takes exception to judgment and decree dated 26.09.2003 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasco in Special Civil Suit No.61/1996/B, by which the Trial Court decreed the suit filed by the respondent no.1 and 2. 2. The appellant is defendant no.5, the respondent nos.1 and 2 are the plaintiffs and respondent no.3 to 6 are the defendant no.1 to 4 respectively in the above suit. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status in the ... 4 ... suit before the Trial Court. 3. The plaintiff no.2 is the son of the plaintiff no.1. The plaintiff filed the above suit for a declaration the they were the sole and universal heirs of late Prakash Naik and therefore, they were entitled to all the benefits from the defendant no.2 to 4 due to late Prakash. The plaintiffs also sought declaration that the marriage of the appellant and Prakash solemnised on 17.07.1983 was null and void. The plaintiffs further sought declaration that the Deed of Succession and Qualification of heirs drawn before the Ex-Officio Notary and Sub Registrar of Tiswadi Taluka at Panaji by which the defendant no.5 was declared as the sole successor of the estate of late Prakash be declared null and void. The plaintiffs also sought the amount due from the Insurance Company, the Bank and ... 5 ... Mormugao Port Trust with whom late Prakash was employed. The suit was contested and the Trial Court by the impugned judgment and decree decreed the suit. In the Trial Court, the appellant claimed that she was married to late Praksh and the marriage was registered at Sawantwadi on 17.7.1983. She further claimed that late Prakash had represented to her that he was unmarried. The plaintiffs raised a counter claim claiming that she was the surviving spouse and was the sole successor of late Prakash. Before the Trial Court, the defendant no.5 claimed right to the entire estate left by deceased Prakash. The Trial Court upon appreciation of the evidence and the legal position held that the plaintiff no.1 was the legally wedded wife by placing reliance upon the Marriage Certificate produced by the plaintiff at Pw.1/Dw.1/A. The marriage was solemnised on 17.05.1978. The Trial Court held that under Article 5 of the Law of ... 6 ... Marriage, in force in Goa, a person cannot enter into a marriage during the subsistence of the earlier marriage. Placing reliance upon Article 11 and clause 6 of Article 4 of the Law of Marriage, the Trial Court held that the marriage solemnised during the subsistence of the earlier marriage was presumed to be non existing. Resultantly, the Trial Court held that since the defendant no.5 had married late Prakash during the subsistence of valid marriage of plaintiff no.1, the marriage of defendant no.5 with late Prakash was null and void. Consequently, the Trial Court held that the defendant no.5 did not have right of any nature in the estate of late Prakash and upon marriage of plaintiff no.1 with late Prakash, she was entitled to half share and upon his death, plaintiff no.2 would inherit the estate to the exclusion of others under Article 1969 of the Civil Code. The Trial Court held that the plaintiffs being ... 7 ... the wife and son of late Prakash, were entitled to inherit the estate of late Prakash and as such the defendant no.5 is not entitled to receive any benefit accrued upon the death of Prakash. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, the defendant no.5 has filed the present appeal. 4. Ms. Kamat, learned counsel for the appellant at the outset, submitted that although before the Trial Court, the defendant no.5/appellant claimed right to the entire estate left by late Prakash, the appellant would restrict her claim to one fourth share in the estate left by late Prakash in the appeal and the appellant would have no objection if three fourth share in the estate left by late Prakash is alloted to the plaintiffs. Ms. Kamat place reliance upon Article 30 of the Law of Marriage, which is in force in Goa and submitted that ... 8 ... wherever a void or voidable marriage has been contracted bona-fide, the woman who gets married to a person already married is entitled to a share in the estate of the person, if the marriage is contracted bona-fide. According to Ms. Kamat, defendant no.5 had contracted the marriage with late Prakash bonafide relying upon the representation made by him that he was unmarried and since admittedly, late Prakash was not staying with his wife/plaintiff no.1 for a period of over six years before solemnisation of the marriage, the only inference that can be drawn is that the defendant no.5 had contracted the marriage bonafide. Learned counsel therefore, submitted that the defendant no.5 is entitled to one fourth share in the estate left by Prakash. No other point was raised in support of the appeal. 5. Except for respondent no.5 other ... 9 ... respondents chose not to put in appearance. Mr. Nadkarni appearing on behalf of the respondent no.5 submitted that his client would abide by the order passed by this Court. 6. In view of the submissions made by the appellant/defendant no.5, the following point arises for determination in the appeal. Whether the appellant/defendant no.5 is entitled to one fourth share in the estate left by late Prakash in view of Article 30 of the Law of Marriage since the defendant no.5/appellant had married Prakash bonafide believing that he was unmarried ? ... 10 ... 7. Since reliance has been placed upon Article 30 of the Law of Marriage, it would be appropriate to quote Article 30. It reads thus: Article 30 - Whenever a void or voidable marriage has been contracted bona-fide, it shall have civil effects with relation to the spouses. If only one of the spouses has contracted it bone-fide, the marriage shall produce effect in favour of such spouse only. 8. Article 30 finds its place in Chapter IV which deals with effect of annulment, specially with respect to the fate of the minor children. Chapter IV consists of 8 sections, from Article 30 to Article 37. ... 11 ... 9. The question, which arises for consideration is whether if void or voidable marriage has been contracted bona-fide, the spouse entering into marriage bona-fide without the knowledge of the first marriage of such spouse would be entitled to share in the estate left by her spouse ? 10. From a bare reading of Article 30, it is clear that if a void or voidable has been contracted bona-fide by a spouse, it shall have civil effects with relation to the spouses. I am unable to accept the submission of Ms. Kamat that the said provision entitles the spouse entering into void or voidable marriage bona-fide to the estate left by her spouse. It is pertinent to note that Article 30 finds its place in Chapter IV dealing with effects of annulment specially with respect to the fate of minor children. Reading of Articles 30 to 37 which ... 12 ... are found in Chapter IV makes it abundantly clear that the said provisions deal with the effects of annulment of marriage, more particularly with respect to the effect of such annulment on minor children. 11. In my considered opinion, Article 30 does not confer any right on the spouse, to claim a share in the estate left by her spouse, if the marriage is void or voidable provided wuch marriage is contracted bonafide. In the present case, it is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the second marriage was void having being solemnised during the subsistence of the first marriage. This being the position, I find myself unable to accept the submission of Ms. Kamat that the appellant is entitled to one fourth share in the estate left by late Prakash. ... 13 ... 12. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Consequently the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. A. P. LAVANDE, J. lh/.