Sridhara Vs. Mahidhara

Students of Law study various branches law like Civil Law, Criminal Law, Constitution Law, International Law, Law of Torts, Taxation Law and so on. There are also branches of law like Animal Law, Immigration Law, Family Law, Employment Law and many others. As the boundaries of the society and human activities expand, more and more branches of law are being added. Vast growth in science and technology has brought in some more branches of law. 

In the context of any discussion on the subject of law, the word "jurisprudence" is often used. What is Jurisprudence? Dictionary meaning of Jurisprudence is that it is the study of law and the principles on which it is based. Its meaning is expanded and referred as "The philosophy and theory of law that is primarily concerned with both what law is and what it ought to be". This includes issues of how persons and social relations are understood in legal terms, and of the values in and of law. Jurisprudence also draws its content from philosophy, social order, history, economics, and politics as well. It covers a wide area of human life and its development over the centuries. Certain legal principles may appear to be patently absurd, but one can find the rationale in such ideas by study of jurisprudence. 

Students of law as well as practicing law professionals like lawyers and judges often refer to the development of jurisprudence over the years. Unfortunately, most of the learning in Jurisprudence in law colleges starts with early 16th century. The decisions of "Privy Council" find repeated mentions in jurisprudence. The word jurisprudence itself comes from the Latin phrase "juris prudentia" which means "knowledge of law" or "the study of law". But it is to be remembered that there was an excellent system of administering justice in ancient Greece, China as well as in India and some other parts of the world. 

Vast amount of knowledge accumulated in ancient India was lost when the magnificent libraries in Indian universities and other private libraries were burnt down by invaders. Even then, as the main learning method in ancient India was reading the major texts and memorising them, a stream of knowledge has passed on from the teachers to students over generations in India. A system equivalent to Privy Council and Bar Councils, or even better than that, existed in India long before the ideas of jurisprudence germinated in the west. It is because of this that jurisprudence in India has a history of over 2,000 years!

A 3rd Century AD case known as Sridhara Vs. Mahidhara is a testament to this long heritage of jurisprudence in India.

***** 

Most of the people are familiar with the Hindi film "Sholay" released in 1975, Some may have watched it many times too. There is a scene in that film where the Jailor is talking to the Police Inspector Thakur Baldev Singh (played by Sanjeev Kumar). Inspector has been sanctioned leave and he is proceeding to his home town for celebration of the birthday of the grandson. The jailor is surprised and asks the inspector as to how he has a grandson despite being so young and how many members are there in his family. Inspector replies that he has two sons and two daughters-in-law as well as a daughter who is to be got married soon. He says, "in villages we get married early. I got married early. My son was born when I was very young. He was married early and my grandson was also born when I was young!". This was true until the end of last century. Three generations were common in families and there were four generations alive in many families. There used to be a special function when the fourth generation child arrived, known as "Prapoutra Darshana Shanti" which is popularly known as "Kanakabhisheka" (Please Click Here to read about this celebration). There were also rare families where there were five generations of persons alive at the same time, though for a very short time span.

The four  generations are known as Pita (Father), Putra (Son), Poutra (Grandson) and Prapoutra (Great Grandson) in Sanskrit, when considered in descending order. In the ascending order it becomes Atman (Self), Pita (father), Pitamaha (Grandfather) and Prapitamaha (Great Grandfather).  When a person accepts Sanyas, he cannot have anyone performing his shraadda in future. Hence he performs his own shraadda and then takes sanyas. Such shradda is, therefore, known as Atma Shraadda, which means performing one's own shraadda. If the fifth generation elder is alive, he will be known as Vruddha Prapitamaha (Great Great Grandfather). This is why during the Sapindikarana Shraadda (usually performed on the 12th day after death of a person), the sons include their father with the earlier three generations and release the fifth generation person by giving him "Swarga Patheya" (Patheya means something for use during the journey. Patha means the way or road) and send him to heaven so that they are left with the three generation elders for future shraddas.

This information is required to understand the contents of the judgement in Mahidhara Vs. Sridhara.

*****

Some 1,700 years ago, in the 3rd century AD, there lived a family of four generations in Pataliputra, present day Patna. Gadadhara (Father or Pita), Chakradhara (Son or Putra), Giridhara (Grandson or Poutra) and Mahidhara (Great grandson or Prapoutra) lived with other members of the family. For the purpose of the family requirements, Gadadhara borrowed 10,000 panas (coins or unit of money at that time) at a rate of interest of 2 percent per month (similar to today's credit cards as it works out to more than 24% when compounded) from a money lender named Sridhara. An epidemic struck the area some time thereafter (like the present day Corona) and large number of people died due to it. In the family of the borrower, Gadadhara, Chakradhara and Giridhara died leaving behind Mahidhara, the great grand son of Gadadhara. 

When Sridhara demanded the return of the loan amount from Mahidhara, Mahidhara refused the obligation to repay as the money was borrowed by his great grand father. Aggrieved by this Sridhara filed a case against Mahidhara in the court. Mahidhara consulted a lawyer by name Smartha Dhurandhara (The word Durandhara means one who is capable of taking or holding the load!). Durandhara told Mahidhara that the shastras say that the liability is up to Poutra (meaning grandson) and hence he need not pay. He argued as such in the court. The court agreed with the argument, but felt that justice is not done to Sridhara because Mahidhara got all the assets of his great grandfather but is escaping the liability due to this technical interpretation. The court referred the matter to a higher forum, similar to later day Privy Councils. it was known as "Pandita Mandali", a group of scholars.

Pandita Mandali considered the case and relied on the principle that "when an asset passes on, corresponding liabilities also pass on", and held that Mahidhara cannot escape the liability of repayment of the loan taken by his great grandfather as he has inherited all his assets. The suit was decreed as such. Mandali held that Mahidhara is bound by the "Doctrine of pious obligations" and hence bound to repay the loan. The Pandita Mandali took serious note of the pleadings of Smartha Durandhara and cancelled his "Sannad" (authority to practice law) as his stand was false, vexatious and misguiding the society!

*****

Justice M Rama Jois was an eminent advocate from Karnataka who later served as a Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, Rajya Sabha member and Governor of Bihar and Jharkhand states. Mandagadde Rama Jois (1931-2021)  had studied several interesting cases of the country in his career while working in the courts as advocate and judge, as well as Governor of Bihar and Jharkhand states. He has written several books enumerating those interesting cases, including the above one, in his books, His book "Legal and Constitutional History of India" is considered as of immense value for understanding development of Jurisprudence in India.

The proceedings of Supreme court and High Courts in India is being shown live for the last few months. In one of the High Court of Karnataka cases recently, a litigant made a submission before Hon. Justice Sreeshananda that his father had not left anything for him. The judge observed that the litigant is standing in the court because his father has left him behind and mentioned the above case. It is not proper to expect that parents should leave behind assets for the children. On the other hand, the children should develop capabilities to create assets on their own.

Justice Shreeshanda is considered as a very learned judge and his court proceedings are often a source to learn about many things in law as well as life, His observations recently about two cases, however, came for sharp reactions from public as well as the Supreme Court. The judge expressed regrets about these observations in the open court later on.

*****

The case of Sridhara Vs. Mahidhara has many lessons for students and practitioners of law as well as general public about several important aspects of law and life at large, It also explains how jurisprudence evolves over time and enhances effectiveness of administration of justice.