Hindu Marriage Act, 1955:

s.16(3) - Right of illegitimate children in the coparcenary property of their parents - Whether illegitimate children are entitled to a share in the coparcenary property or whether their share is limited only to the self-acquired property of their parents u/s.16(3) - Held: s.16(3) makes it clear that a child of a void or voidable marriage can only claim rights to the property of his parents, and no one else - The legislature has advisedly used the word "property" and has not qualified it with either self-acquired property or ancestral property - It has been kept broad and general - The issues relating to the extent of property rights conferred on such children u/s. 16(3) of the amended Act were discussed in detail in the case of Jinia Keotin case wherein it was held that in the light of express mandate of the legislature itself, there is no room for according upon such children, who but for s. 16 would have been branded as illegitimate, any further rights than envisaged therein by resorting to any presumptive or inferential process of reasoning, having recourse to the mere object or purpose of enacting s. 16 - Article 39 (f) must be kept in mind by the Court while interpreting the provision of' s. 16(3) of the Act . Apart from Article 39(f), Article 300A also comes into play while interpreting the concept of property rights - Supreme Court in the case of  Jinia Keotin and Bharatha Matha took narrow view of s. 16(3) of the Act - Therefore, matter needs reconsideration and is referred to larger bench - Reference to larger bench - Hindu Law - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 300A, 39(f).

s. 16 - Status of illegitimate children and their right in property of their parents - Effect of amendment of s.16 - Held: The amendment to s. 16 of the Act was introduced by Act 60 of 76 - With the amendment of s.16(3), the common law view that the offsprings of marriage which is void and voidable are illegitimate 'ipso-Jure' has changed completely.  The status of such children which has been legislatively declared legitimate must be recognised and simultaneously law recognises the rights of such children in the property of their parents - This is a law to advance the socially beneficial purpose of removing the stigma of illegitimacy on such children who are as innocent as any other children.

Interpretation of statutes: Purposive interpretation - Held: Courts cannot interpret a socially beneficial legislation on the basis as if the words therein are cast in stone - Such legislation must be given a purposive interpretation to further and not to frustrate the eminently desirable social purpose - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - s.16(3). Constitution of India, 1950: Articles 300A, 39(f) - Held: Right to property is no longer fundamental but it is a Constitutional right and Article 300A contains a guarantee against deprivation of property right save by authority of law.