ST.

WILFRED'S COLLEGE OF LAW

MOOT PROBLEM ( 2021-22)

Sunita, a Hindu girl and Abdul a Hanafi Muslim, were studying in a University for a
post graduate degree. They were deeply in love with each other and decided to marry.
When Sunits’s father Mahendra came to know about her intentions, he promptly asked
her to leave the house. Abdul’s parents also disapproved the marriage and he too was
compelled to leave his home.

Asha, the wife of Mahendra, fearing that Sunita might put an end to her life, requested
her (Asha’s) brother Manoj to arrange for the marriage of Sunita and Abdul taking
into consideration the best interests of Sunita.

Manoj, who had a smattering knowledge of law, convinced Abdul that if he married
Sunita according to Islamic form he might be pressurised to divorce her or get married
to another Muslim girl, that the situation demanded they should solemnized their
marriage quickly and therefore he should marry Sunita according to Hindu Law as a
Hindu.

Later Manoj took them to a temple, where the priest asked Abdul whether he was
willing to marry the girl according to the Hindu form, as a Hindu. Abdul gave his
assent. The priest then sprinkled some holy water, smeared holy ashes on their
forehead and solemnized the marriage. The above events took place in the year 2014,
Manoj using his influence, secured a lucrative job for Abdul in Abu Dhabi and the
young couple lived in Abu Dhabi.

While in Abu Dhabi a Son Abbas, was born to them, Sunita was bringing him up as a
Hindu, however, in the Islamic milieu of Abu Dhabi, Abdul on occasions used to
attend the congregational prayers. Two years after the birth of Abbas, the parents of
Abdul passes away in quick succession.

In the year 2020, Abdul died in road accident leaving behind substantial properties.
On Abdul’s death his brother Ummar filed a suit for declaration that Abdul’s marriage
was invalid and therefore he was the sole heir to the property of Abdul according to
Muslim law. He further contended that even if the marriage was valid, Sunita and
Abbas were not entitled to inherit the properties of Abdul as they were Non-Muslims.
Sunita and Abbas contested the claim of Ummar and in addition revised the plea that
even if Muslim law is applicable to the case, the disqualification unopposed by
Muslim law on non-Muslim to inherit the properties of a Muslim is constitutionally
invalid.
Argue the case before the High Court of Delhi on the basis of applicable personal law
and the Constitution of India.

Q. 01- Whether marriage of Sunita and Abdul was Valid or Not ? If valid under which
law?

Q. 02- Whether Abbas is Legitimate or Illegitimate Son ?

Q. 03- What is the basis of distribution of property?

Under which Law?

1. Hindu Succession Act,1956

2. Muslim Personal Law
3. Indian Succession Act,1925

Advance additional arguments if any.

Reference :-
1. Hindu Law
2. Muslim Law
3. Special marriage Act
4. Indian Succession Act
5. Caste Disability Act
6. Constitution of India
 सेंट विल्फ्रेड कॉलेज ऑफ लॉ

मूट प्रॉब्लम (2021-22)

सुनीता, एक ह िंदू लड़की और अब्दु ल एक नफी मुस्लिम, एक हिश्वहिद्यालय में स्नातकोत्तर हिग्री के
हलए पढ़ र े थे। िे एक-दू सरे से बहुत प्यार करते थे और उन्ोिंने शादी करने का फैसला हकया। सुनीता
के हपता म ें द्र को जब उसकी मिंशा के बारे में पता चला तो उसने तुरिंत उसे घर छोड़ने के हलए क ा।
अब्दु ल के माता-हपता ने भी शादी को अस्वीकार कर हदया और उसे भी अपना घर छोड़ने के हलए
मजबूर ोना पड़ा।

म ेंद्र की पत्नी आशा, इस िर से हक सुनीता उसके जीिन का अिंत कर सकती ै , उसने (आशा के) भाई
मनोज से सुनीता के सिोत्तम ह तोिं को ध्यान में रखते हुए सुनीता और अब्दु ल की शादी की व्यिस्था
करने का अनुरोध हकया।

मनोज, हजसे कानून का एक छोटा सा ज्ञान था, ने अब्दु ल को आश्वस्त हकया हक अगर उसने सुनीता से
इिामी रूप में शादी की तो उस पर उसे तलाक दे ने या हकसी अन्य मुस्लिम लड़की से शादी करने के
हलए दबाि िाला जा सकता ै , इस स्लस्थहत की मािंग ै हक उन्ें अपनी शादी जल्दी से करनी चाह ए और
इसहलए उसे चाह ए हक ि ह िंदू कानून के अनुसार सुनीता से ह िंदू के रूप में शादी करें ।

बाद में मनोज उन्ें एक मिंहदर में ले गए, ज ािं पुजारी ने अब्दु ल से पूछा हक क्या ि ह िंदू की तर
लड़की से ह िंदू रूप में शादी करने को तैयार ै। अब्दु ल ने ामी भर दी। पुजारी ने हफर कुछ पहित्र जल
हछड़का, उनके माथे पर पहित्र राख हबखेरी और हििा को सिंपन्न हकया। उपरोक्त घटनाएँ िर्ष 2014 में
हुईिं, मनोज ने अपने प्रभाि का उपयोग करके अबू धाबी में अब्दु ल के हलए एक आकर्षक नौकरी
ाहसल की और युिा जोड़ा अबू धाबी में र ता था।

जबहक अबू धाबी में एक बेटा अब्बास पैदा हुआ था, सुनीता उसे एक ह िंदू के रूप में लालन -पालन कर
र ी थी ालािंहक, अबू धाबी के इिामी पररिेश में, अब्दु ल कई मौकोिं पर सामूह क प्राथषनाओिं में शाहमल
ोता था। अब्बास के जन्म के दो साल बाद, अब्दु ल के माता-हपता का जल्दी ी हनधन ो गया।

िर्ष 2020 में अब्दु ल की एक सड़क दु घषटना में मौत ो गई थी और ि अपने पीछे काफी सिंपहत्त छोड़
गया था। अब्दु ल की मृत्यु पर उसके भाई उमर ने घोर्णा के हलए एक मुकदमा दायर हकया हक अब्दु ल
की शादी अमान्य थी और इसहलए ि मुस्लिम कानून के अनुसार अब्दु ल की सिंपहत्त का एकमात्र
उत्तराहधकारी था। उन्ोिंने आगे तकष हदया हक भले ी शादी िैध थी, सुनीता और अब्बास अब्दु ल की
सिंपहत्तयोिं को हिरासत में पाने के कदार न ीिं थे क्योिंहक िे गैर-मुस्लिम थे। सुनीता और अब्बास ने उमर
के दािे का हिरोध हकया और इसके अलािा इस दलील को भी दो राया हक भले ी मुस्लिम कानून
मामले पर लागू ो, लेहकन मुस्लिम कानून द्वारा गैर-मुस्लिम को मुस्लिम की सिंपहत्त हिरासत में दे ने की
अयोग्यता सिंिैधाहनक रूप से अमान्य ै।
पक्षकार व्यस्लक्तगत कानून और भारत के सिंहिधान के आधार पर हदल्ली उच्च न्यायालय के समक्ष मामले
पर ब स करें ।

प्रश्न 01- सुनीता और अब्दु ल की शादी िैध थी या न ीिं? यहद िैध ै तो हकस कानून के त त?

Q. 02- अब्बास िैध ै या नाजायज बेटा?

प्रश्न 03- सिंपहत्त के हितरण का आधार क्या ै ?

हकस कानून के त त?

1. ह िंदू उत्तराहधकार अहधहनयम, 1956

2. मुस्लिम पसषनल लॉ

3. भारतीय उत्तराहधकार अहधहनयम, 1925

अहग्रम अहतररक्त तकष यहद कोई ो।

सिंदभष :-

1. ह िंदू कानून 4. भारतीय उत्तराहधकार अहधहनयम

2. मुस्लिम कानून 5. जाहत हनिःशक्तता अहधहनयम

3. हिशेर् हििा अहधहनयम 6. भारत का सिंहिधान

 RULES AND REGULATION REGARDING MOOT
COURT

1. Aim and purpose

(i) To give exposure to students pursuing the law course to the environment of the court
system in India and to hone their. advocacy skills.
(ii) To provide a real-life experience cum training in doing cutting edge research, presenting
groundbreaking arguments, and contributing to the development of jurisprudence in
concerned areas of law.

2. Date and Venue

December 11th 2021, St. Wilfred's College of Law, Jaipur

3. Language
(i) The Competition shall be conducted in Bilingual (In both English or Hindi).

4. Eligibility
(i) The Competition shall be open for students who are pursuing three LLB or five-year BA.
LL.B. course .

5. Team Composition
(i) Each team shall consist of two members. This team composition cannot be altered under
any circumstances.

(iii) Every team shall consist of two speakers. No additional member can be part of a team in
any capacity. If any third member is accompanying the team.

6. DRESS CODE

Inside the court room the participant shall follow the below mentioned dress code;

(i) Females: White Salwar Kurta & Dupatta or white shirt and black trousers along with black coat
and tie.

(ii) Males: white shirt, black trousers, black tie along with black coat and Black shoes. The dress code
for all the functions at the competition shall be western formals for gentlemen and western or Indian
formals for ladies.
MEMORIAL RULES

(i) Teams have to submit memorials for both the parties to the dispute.

(ii) The last date for submission of Hard Copies of the memorial is 01:30 A.M. on 10th
December 2021.

(iii) Delayed submission of memorials will result in deduction of marks.

(iv) The hard copies of the memorials shall bear a cover page in accordance with the
following colour scheme:

• Memorial for the Petitioner - Blue

• Memorial for the Respondent - Red

(v) Memorials must be printed on A-4 paper with black ink and must be neatly bound.

(vi) The font of the body of the Memorial must be in Times New Roman, size 12, with 1.5
line spacing.

(vii) The size of footnotes, if any, must be in Times new Roman, font size 10 with line
spacing of 1.5.

(viii) Each page must have a margin of 1 inch on each sides.

(ix) The memorials should be covered with a plastic cover or be spiral bound or combed
bound. Use of butter paper, plastic sheets, spiral binding etc. is strictly prohibited.

(x)The memorials must contain the following details:

• Cover page/Cause title.

• Table of contents
• List of abbreviations
• Index of Authorities.
• Statement of Jurisdiction.
• Statement of Facts.
• Statement of issues
• Summary of Arguments.
• Arguments / Pleadings.
• Conclusion/Prayer

The Index of Authorities must list all the authorities cite in the Memorial. The Index
must indicate the page number(s) of the Memorial in which the authority is cited.

(xi) Teams are required to follow 20th edition of the Harvard Blue Book Pattern.
(xii) The Memorial must not contain any Annexure/ Photographs/
Sketches/Exhibits/Affidavits etc.

(xiii) No amendments can be made after the submission of the copy of the memorial.

(xxii) Hard copy of the memorials shall be identical.

Modifications/additions/alterations shall attract penalty/disqualification.

MARKING CRITERIA

Presentation (10 Marks)

Facts(10 Marks)
Arguments(10 Marks)
Legal Knowledge(10 Marks)
Moot Memorial( 10 Marks)
(TOTAL 50)

MISCELLANEOUS & DISCLAIM

Disclaimer

The Material in the Moot Court proposition is not intended to and does not attempt to
resemble any incident or any person living or dead. All material in the problem is
fictitious and any resemblance to any incident or person, if any, is not intended, but
merely co-incidental.

Miscellaneous

The organizers of this l Moot Court Competition may amend the Competition Rules.
However, any such amendment shall be brought to the notice of the participating
teams.

All Participants are expected to maintain decorum in the Court during the competition
and are expected to conduct themselves in a manner befitting the legal profession. The
Organising Committee reserves the right to take appropriate action for any unethical.