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 co-

ordination 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.