An Assignment On Family Law On Topic Marriage Was A

1

SANGRUR

An ASSIGNMENT ON FAMILY LAW ON TOPIC MARRIAGE WAS A SACRAMENT OR IS A CONTRACT?

Submitted by

ARUN BANSAL Submitted to

Miss. Rupinder Pal Kaur

2

ACKNOWLEDGE MENT

Project work is an excellent tool for learning and exploration. We writing this report received valuable assistance and guidance from the number of person to whom we want to express my gratefulness. First of all we wish to express our profound gratitude & science makes to our teacher of Family Law Miss.Rupinder Pal Kaur. Who gave us the topic MARRIAGE WAS A SACRAMENT OR IS A CONTRACT & provided us with various books and guided us at every point with her rich knowledge. Experience & suggestions without whom the successful completion of the assignment would have been impossible.

3

PREFACE

Introduction About the theory Nature of rights Threats to rights Criticism Conclusion

4

INTRODUCTION

I order to live ; a man must have some rights, to develop his personality to the particular rights. It state is the first condition of a civilized life, the civilized life requires a set of special rights that a man must have. We may differentiate between Govt. In the context of there relative merits & demerits taking into account the rights of the people. In this way, the concept of rights finds its broad manifestation in the liberties of the individual on the one hand and in the scope of state activity on the other.

The main aim of modern states is to provide more & more facilities to its citizens and to improve their living standard and to make their lives more comfortable and happy. To achieve this aim state provides many facilities, which are termed as rights. Prof. Laski has said,” The state is known by the rights it maintains.”

5

Rights are necessary for the upliftment of individual’s social, economics, political, psychological and moral condition. They are not only necessary of individual welfare but also for the welfare of the society.

6

ABOUT THE THEORY

Like the other concepts of likes, his views about rights has also gradually changed up to 1985 he was a pluralist & against the sovereignty of the state as such the felt that rights were above the state. During this period he up held the theory of natural rights and felt that these rights were about the state. Later he felt rights were those conditions of social life, without which no man could be at his best. He felt that rights were prior to state. Subsequently he changed his definition about rights & said that these are fundamental notions of each age. He now felt that there was no idea of an absolute ethics from which rights flowed. Then he tried to give historical justification to the concept of the natural rights. In his book grammar of politics he has said that rights are those conditions without which are cannot realize his moral being. But at last he concluded. “Rights are those conditions of social life without which no man can seeks to be himself at his best.”

7

NEED According to Laski rights are most essential and every citizen must have certain basic rights. He feels that technically rights are creation of society and state only recognizance’s conditions them .He also feels that rights are those conditions by which we develop our. Personality and as such it is the foremost duty of the state to see that it removes all hindrances which stand in the way of an individual for his development .He however says that each rights should have social utility and must benefit all those for whom it is intended.

According to Laski, rights are not against society but can be claimed within the society and as such these are not exclusive but only relative in nature. These are meant for protection of the members of society. We should clearly realize. That my rights are the duties of others and in the proper performance of my duties, rights of others can be honored and as such each right has some corresponding duty.

8

According to Laski nature & CHARACTERISTICS of rights are.

(1)

State is not the source of rights but only recognizes these :-In the words of Laski, ”the state, briefly, doesn’t create. But recognizes rights and its character will be apparent from rights, that is any given period secure recognition, according to Laski me state is not source of rights rather it is servant which protects the rights .the moral basis of the power of state is an the protection of rights.

(2)

State creates conditions for the enjoyment of rights :According to Laski, rights are actually demands of man to the state and state is forced to recognize these rights and creates proper environment for enjoying them. For example every person has rights to life and this is the responsibility of the state to project the life.

(3)

Individual has the rights to oppose the state :- Laski felt that since on individual was an end in itself there fore, he

9

had rights against the state. He gives the rights to man to appose the wrong and unjust laws of the state. He is of the opinion that the man should not obey orders of the state blindly.

(4)

There are rights which have been recognized and rights which demand recognized : - According to Laski, rights are of two types: i.

Rights, which are recognized by the state.

ii.

Rights, which claim the recognition of the state. According to Laski recognition by the state is not essential for the rights .Its is of the opinion that all reasonable claims of the individual are rights.

(5)

Rights changes with time & situation : -Laski does not believe in the unchanqable nature of the rights. Citizens of every country are provided different rights according to the situations. Slavery which was common in ancient time has been eradicated in modern times. Similarly the nature of the rights to property is different in different state.

10

(6)

Close relationship between rights & duties : - According to Laski, each a right carries with it a corresponding duty. An individual cannot develop his personality unless he feels that he has certain obligation towards others. He should work on clear principals,” My claim comes from the fact and share with other in the pursuit of common end,” he feels with the proper performance of duties o0nly can the rights be joined.

(7)

Equal utility of rights for every body :- According to Laski ,rights are equally important for everybody .So ,may should be equally given to every citizen .For example ,rights to expression is not only for one class but also for common man.

(8)

Everybody must get minimum equality and freedom : Laski is of opinion that man needs basic freedom and equality so that he may increase his slandered in bad atmosphere even fruits and vegetables get ritten, similarly if the political atmosphere is suffocation than man cannot grow his personality.

11

THREATS TO RIGHTS

According to Prof. laski there are three main dangers to the “concept of rights” they are :-

i)

Capitalism :- according to Laski, capitalism is an economic system in which labourers are exploited. They are not provided adequate wages but are forced to work hard. The rich man exploits the poor one and does not give him proper rights.

ii)

Fascism

:-In

fascism

one

person

enjoys

enormous powers and does not bother about the rights to other persons.

iii)

Communism :- Laski is of the opinion that in the communist countries individual is not given the right to oppose and dissent and opposition is suppressed by force. Though in the beginning Laski was the supporter of communism but later on he become its rodent critic.

12

CRITICISM

Critics say that laski was not a political philosopher. as he was not consistent in his views. As far his theory of rights is concerned he is criticized on the following points.

1. State is the source of rights:- Laski believes that is not the source of rights, it only recognizes them but this is wrong. Man can enjoy only those rights which are given by the state. State doesn’t give recognition to every human demand. State recognition only those demands which are in favour of social welfare .Man cannot enjoy7 any right against the will of the state.

2. Individual cannot oppose the state :- Laski also gives right to revolt against the injustice of the state. But what is just or unjust, who will decide it? Apart from this if the individual is given the right to oppose the state .there will be anarchy in the state and everybody will do whatever he wants ton do there fore, an individual cannot given they right to oppose the state.

13

3. Recognition of the rights is essential :- According to Laski ,the recognition of rights by the state is essential .he regards every legitimated demand as right but all legitimate demands are not rights. Rights to work is one of the legitimate demand Indian citizen but this is not a right as recognized by the state.

4. Different associations cannot be given independent right :- Laski advocates to give independent rights to different associations and state cannot withdraw any right from those associations. if it be true there will be anarchy everywhere.

Every

association

will

have

its

own

independent rights and there will be problem of coordination among those.

5. Different associations cannot be given status equal to the state:- Laski considers state as one of the associations but this is not so. state is a supreme association and it fulfils many demands of the society where association can meet any partial demands.

14

IMPORTANCE

In spite of the criticism Laski’s theory of right is considered to be the most appropriate theory of the rights. He does not make status absolute. He also provides with the safeguards of the protection of rights. This theory is appreciated even today because of the following points:I. Laski has given importance to the social aspect of rights and he considers rights essential for overall growth of man. II. Laski is against the absoluteness of the state and according to him state is not source of rights state only recognizes these right. III. He warns against the dangers to the rights. IV. Laski

accepts

the

importance

of

associations

and

organizations within the state. V. The describes about the security measure to be adopted for the safe guard of rights.

15

There for people treat him as a great thinker and philosopher. Even today he is read & listened with great respect.

16

CONCLUSION

From all the matter, are we can conclude that his general concept is that rights are necessary conditions for development of human personality and a source of human happiness. The fact of his theory of rights was that he has placed rights above the state. Laski worked on the basic assumption and principal. That individual is an end and as such the state should only be means to an end. He feels that with proper performance of duties only can the rights be enjoyed and in words of Laski, ”Maintence of rights is much more habit and tradition than the formality to enactment .”Right have there fore not one but two sides. He has stressed on the sound principal that rights & duties must go hand in hand. Basically his theory was a fine mixture of individualism & socialism .Being individualist he is in favor of giving to man the freedom to speech and expression ,person freedom religious freedom and being a socialist Laski is the

17

supporter of the right to work adequate wages and of social security to man. But he is not in favor of giving any right against social interest. Although Laski was a liberalist thinker but he did not accept most of the concepts of liberalists. He started as a pluralist but ended as Marxist . Marx’s influence on him was immense. he agreed with him so far as his ideas about capitalism & private property were concerned. But he differed from him in his ideas about working clear improvement centralization of authority use of violence or materialistic he conception of history were concerned .He also differed from Marx in details of his basic principal and methods of implementation.