Whether Hindu law applies to conversion and reconversion?

Perumal Nadar (Dead) by Lrs. Vs.Ponnuswami

Contentions
Perumal:
1. Annapazham was an Indian Christian and a marriage between a Hindu and an Indian Christian was
regarded by the courts as void
2. The marriage was invalid because it was prohibited by the Madras Act 6 of 1949
3. Ann and Perumal were living apart for a long time before the birth of Ponnuswami and so the child could
not be regarded as a legitimate child of Perumal.
4. The absence of evidence that Ann was converted to Hinduism before marriage. So even if the marriage
was performed according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies, it is not valid in law.

SC Holdings
What rules determine that a person has converted?
1. A mere theoretical allegiance to the Hindu faith by a person to the Hindu faith by a person born in
another faith does not convert him into a Hindu, nor is a bare declaration that he is a Hindu sufficient to
convert him to Hinduism.
2. In Muthusami Mudaliar v Masilamani alias Subramania Mudaliar, it was held that the marriage
contracted according to Hindu rites by a Hindu with a Christian woman, who before marriage converted
to Hinduism, is valid, even if it was not in strict accordance with the Hindu system of law.
3. In Goona Durgaprasada Roa and Anr v Goona Sudarasanaswami and Ors, it was observed that no
gesture or declaration may change a man’s religion, but when on the facts it appears that a man did
change his religion and was accepted b his coreligionists as having changed his religion and lived and
dies in that religion, absence of some formality cannot negative what is an actual fact.
4. Krishnaswami Ayyangar J observed that a Hindu who had converted himself to Christian faith returned
to Hinduism and contracted a second marriage during the lifetime of his first wife and remained and died
a Hindu having been accepted as such by the community and coreligionists without demur. Absence of
evidence of rituals relating to conversion cannot justify the court in treating him as having remained a
Christian.
5. Ann’s marriage was perfofmed according to Hindu rites and ceremonies in the presence of the relatives
who were invited to attend, customary ceremonies peculiar to a marriage between Hindus was
performed, no objection was raised to the marriage and after the marriage, Ann was accepted by the
local Hindu Nadar community as belonging to the Hindu faith and the plaintiff was also treated as Hindu.
6. Absence of specific expiatory or purifactory ceremonies is not sufficient to hold that she hadn’t converted
to Hinduism before marriage. The fact that the marriage ceremony was conducted according to Hindu
rites in the presence of a large number of persons clearly indicates that he accepted than Ann was
converted to Hinduism before the marriage ceremony was performed.

How to prove non access while determining legitimacy of a child?

1. Chilukuri Venkateswarlu v Chilukuri Venkatanarayana - Mere positive or direct evidence is not sufficient
to establish non-access of a man and his wife. The presumption of legitimacy is highly favored by law
and hence it is necessary that the proof of non-access must be clear and satisfactory.

Case Summary
• Perumal, a Hindu married Annapazham a born Christian. The marriage ceremony was held according to
Hindu rites. After marriage, Ann lived with Perumal as a Hindu. They had 2 children. The elder one died
and the younger child was Ponnuswami. Ponnuswami filed an action in the court of subordinate judge,
Tirunelveli for separate possession of a half share in the properties of the joint family held by his father
Perumal.
• Perumal claimed that (a) the marriage was void according to law as Ann was a Christian and that there
was no proof of her conversion (b) the marriage was void since his first wife Seethalakshmi was living
during the time of his marriage with Ann (c) that he and Ann were living apart during the time of
Ponnuswami’s birth and it cannot be established that Ponnuswami was the legitimate son of Perumal.
• The subordinate judge and the HC ruled in favor of Ponnuswami and the appeal was brought to SC. SC
determined that there was ample evidence that Ann had indeed converted before marriage. And since
both were living in the same village before the birth of Ponnuswami, proof non-access was not clear and
satisfactory.