STRIDHAN: A STUDY

5.3 Family Law II

Submitted by
KRISHNA KANT JAIN
UID No.- SM0115022
Third Year Fifth Semester

National Law University, Assam

 Contents
Table of Cases............................................................................................................................ii

Table of Statutes........................................................................................................................ii

Table of Abbreviation...............................................................................................................iii

Introduction................................................................................................................................1

Aim.............................................................................................................................................2

Objectives...................................................................................................................................2

Scope and Limitations................................................................................................................3

Literature Review.......................................................................................................................3

Research Questions....................................................................................................................4

Research Methodology...............................................................................................................4

History of Stridhan.....................................................................................................................5

Analysis of concept of Stridhan under Modern Hindu Law......................................................8

According to Judicial Interpretations.........................................................................................8

Sources of Stridhan Property...................................................................................................10

Property given under Maintenance-.....................................................................................10

Property obtained in partition-.............................................................................................11

Property given under an award or decree-...........................................................................11

Property under an agreement or compromise-.....................................................................11

Property received in gift-.....................................................................................................12

Property received under a will-............................................................................................12

Rights of a Woman over her Stridhan......................................................................................12

From Stridhan to Women’s Estate...........................................................................................14

Conclusion................................................................................................................................14

Bibliography...............................................................................................................................v

i
Table of Cases
1. Ashok Kumar Chopra v. Vishandi
2. B.T. Govindappa v. B. Narsimhaiah
3. Badri Prasad v. Kanso Devi
4. Bai Vijaya v. Thakuribai Chelabai
5. Balwant Rao v. Baji Rao
6. Bhagwan Das v. Maina Bai
7. Brij Inder Singh v. Janki Kunwar
8. Chinnappa Govinda v. Valliammal
9. Debi Mangal v. Mahadeo Prasad
10. Gangamma v. Koppamal
11. Gopal Singh v. Dile Ram
12. Harikrishan Das v. Sunder Bibi
13. Jagdamba v. Saroswati
14. Kamla Devi v. Bachu Lal
15. Karmi v. Amru
16. Krishna Bhattachajee v. Sarathi Choudhury
17. Lakshmichand v. Sukhdevi
18. Laxman v. Kalicharan
19. Mahadeo v. Bansraji
20. Narayanan v. Unnimayya Antharjanam
21. Nita v. Hitendrakumar Kaluram Sakariya
22. Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar
23. Rashmi Kumar v. Mahesh Kumar Bhada
24. Sham Kunwar v. Wah Kunwar
25. Shanta Bai Babarao v. Ramchandra
26. Shivshanker v. Devi
27. Sital Prasad v. Sri Ram
28. Sorolah v. Bhoobun
29. Venkat v. Venkat
30. Vinod Kumar Sethi v. Punjab State

Table of Statutes
1956- Hindu Succession Act.

ii
Table of Abbreviation

Sr. No. Abbreviation Expansion

1. AIR All India Reporter
2. All Allahabad
3. Anr. Another
4. Bom Bombay
5. HC High Court
6. ibid Ibidem
7. IPC Indian Penal Code
8. P&H Punjab & Haryana
9. MP Madhya Pradesh
10. Pp Pages
11. Raj Rajasthan
12. SCC Supreme Court Cases
13. Vol. Volume
14. MLJ Maharashtra Law Journal
15. Ed. Edition
16. Cal Calcutta
17. Luck Lucknow
18. PC Privy Council
19. Mad Madras
20. LR Law Review

iii
 Abstract

Stridhan is a Sanskrit word which is composed of two words: Stri (woman) and Dhana
(Property). The word literally means the property belonging to a woman or woman’s
property over which she exercises absolute control. Different schools and sects has described
it in different sense, yet it connotes a meaning which comes out from word itself. This is the
etymological sense but the word has a technical meaning given in law. The origin of stridhan
is traced from the vedic literatures and specifically from the Rigvedic period. Apart from that
its description is found in various smritis and commentaries. The entire idea of stridhan
rotated around the economic independence of women. The idea was to protect the married
woman from social insecurity in difficult times. Stridhan also traditionally provided the
woman with socially acceptable access to a share of her family’s property upon marriage
when she moved into her matrimonial home. It differs from Dowry in the way that it is the
voluntary gifts given to a woman before or after her marriage and has no element of
coercion. This distinction was made clear by courts in various cases from time to time. In
modern Hindu law, the term stridhan has very wide meaning, which denotes not only specific
property enumerated in smritis but also other kind of property, which can devolve upon her
own heirs.

iv
Introduction
Stridhan literally means the property of woman over which she has absolute rights of
ownership. It would appear that woman’s property was, from the most ancient times, known
as Stridhan. The term Stridhan was first occurs amongst the smritis in the Dharamasutras of
Gautama and literally means woman’s property1 The mitakshara and the authorities that
follows it take the term Stridhan in its etymological sense as including all kinds of property of
which a woman has become the owner, whatever the extent of her rights over it. 2
Jimutavahana restricts the term of that property of the woman over which she has absolute
control even during the life of her husband. The vyavahara Mayukha, while following the
mitakhshara’s comprehensive signification, make a distinction between technical and non-
technical Stridhan for the purposes of inheritance, designating all those kinds of Stridhan that
are enumerated in the smritis as technical Stridhan.3

In modern Hindu law, the term Stridhan denotes not only the specific kind of property
enumerated in the smritis, but also other species of property acquired or owned by a woman
over which she has absolute control; and she forms the stock of descent in respect of such
property, which accordingly devolves on her own heirs. Properties gifted to a girl before the
marriage, at the time of marriage or at the time of giving fare-well or thereafter are her
Stridhan properties. It is her absolute property with all rights to dispose at her own pleasure.
Husband or other members of his family has no rights over the Stridhan property 4. Husband
may use it during the time of his distress but nevertheless he has a moral obligation to restore
the same or its value to his wife5. Bombay High Court in the case of Nita v. Hitendrakumar
Kaluram Sakariya6 has held that the women is the absolute owner of the stridhan and she is
entitled for the same in the event of divorce. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar7 has held that ‘husband being a custodian of the stridhan
property of his wife, cannot be said to be in join possession thereof and thus acquire a joint
interest in the property.’ Justice Dipak Mishra in his one of the lecture 8 taking reference of a
case of MP high Court9 has also admitted the fact that Stridhan is wife’s property husband
1
Dr. Vijendra Kumar (ed.) Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usages, Bharat Law House, New Delhi 17th ed.
2014, p. 1204
2
ibid
3
Narayanan v. Unnimayya Antharjanam (1945) 1 MLJ 145
4
Krishna Bhattachajee v. Sarathi Choudhury (2016) 2 SCC 705
5
Rashmi Kumar v. Mahesh Kumar Bhada (1997) 2 SCC 397
6
2010 SCC Online Bom 396
7
(1985) 2 SCC 370
8
(2014) 6 SCC J-6
9
In Re: Ashok Kumar Chopra AIR 1996 MP 226

1
can only be trustee in some cases. This make it clear that the woman is absolute owner of her
stridhan Property and no one can claim it as a matter of right or whatsoever.

Sir Henry Maine in his “Early history of Institutions” says: “it is certainly a remarkable fact
that the institution seems to have been developed among the Hindus at a period relatively
much earlier than among the Romans” But he seems to think that it gradually deteriorated to
an insignificant position. This certainly derives no support from the comprehensive and
important position ascribed form the eleventh century to Stridhan by the mitakshara and other
authorities which follow it.10

The modern Hindu laws does not represent the Stridhan as any specific property but it
includes all those properties of a Hindu woman over which she has absolute ownership and
which is inherited by her successors. The concept of Stridhan is different from the concept of
women’s estate there are two basic difference between these two terms.

i. A woman has a limited right of alienation with respect to the properties coming under
term “woman estate”. The right to alienation can be exercised by her only in dire
necessity, legal necessity, or in the interest of estate itself; however, with respect to
Stridhan she has an absolute right of voluntary alienation of the property coming
under it.
ii. In the case of woman ‘s estate the property after the death of the woman owner, is
inherited by the descendants of the male known as reversioners and not by
descendants of the woman but in the case of Stridhan the property is inherited by the
descendants of the woman herself as was the rule under the old hindu law.

Aim
The aim of the article is to make a critical study the concepts of Stridhan and women’s estate
and to analyze the scope of section 14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and how it has brought
the fundamental change in concept of women’s estate.

Objectives
The main objective of the article is to make a socio-legal study of the position of woman’s
property in the present scenario and to analyse the legal status of woman’s property in
today’s context with the help of pertinent judicial interpretations.

10
Supra 1, p. 1205

2
Scope and Limitations
The scope and ambit of the project was too wide that it was practically impossible for the
researcher to comprehend all the aspects of the knowledge into this paper due to the lack of
time and resources. Hence, the researcher has limited the study to an attempt to understand
the origin and nature of woman’s property under Stridhan under the Hindu law and make a
critical analysis of the concept. Also, the researcher has tried to make a socio-legal analysis
of the importance of property rights for women’s well-being, to understand the grey areas, to
critically analyse woman’s estate vis-à-vis Stridhan, to make a socio-legal study of the
position of woman’s property in the present scenario and to analyse the legal status of
woman’s property in today’s context.

Literature Review
Flavia Agnes, FAMILY LAW: FAMILY LAWS AND CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS,
2011

This book provided a detailed account on the concept of woman’s property rights. It revealed
how gradually the notion of property was subverted through patriarchal collusions aided by
colonial judicial decisions.

Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW, 1st ed., 2013

This book was a great help in the research project. It provided a framework to the research
problem by providing the understanding of the concept of the stridhan and women’s estate as
well as its nature and importance.

U.P.D. Kesari, MODERN HINDU LAW, 8th ed., 2011

The book is very much useful for scholars, policy- makers, advocates, academicians and
social workers. It provides a comprehensive study on the idea of woman’s property. The book
very beautifully explains the concept of absolute ownership and limited ownership.

Dr. H. K. Saharay, The Hindu Law of Marriage and Stridhan, 6th ed., 2014

this book is very important from the point of view of this research project. This book
contained an in-depth analysis of concept of marriage and Stridhan under the classical Hindu
law. To proof its every claim the author has provided mostly the proof from the classical text
of Hindus. It is one of the best analysis of classical text of Hindu texts.

3
Dr. Vijendra Kumar (ed.) Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usages, 17th ed., 2014

This book contains the in-depth knowledge of the Hindu law and Usages. The author very
nicely analysed every concept of Hindu law from the classical text to Recent Judicial
Interpretation. The provides a deep analysis of concept of Stridhan its properties, rights of
woman and its succession under different schools of classical Hindu law.

Vandita Sharma, Gender Justice Vis À Vis the Property Rights of Women A
Comparative Study Under Hindu and Muslim Law (Thesis, University of Jammu, 2016)

This is the thesis from a scholar form University of Jammu. The scholar very deeply analysed
the concept of property Rights of woman. A chapter of that was devoted on the topic of
Stridhan its history and its evolution. This is one of the scholarly work on this topic.

Vibha Sirothiya, Stridhan And Womans’ Estate Under Section 14 of Hindu Succession
Act 1956

This article is one of the scholarly article which analysed the concept of Stridhan and
women’s estate hand in hand. This article critically analysed the concept of Stridhan and its
components. This article also analysed the concept of woman’s estate critically.

Research Questions
 What is the concepts of Stridhan and women’s estate?
 What fundamental changes have been brought in context of absolute and limited
ownership?
 What is the position of woman’s property in the present scenario in context of socio-
legal study?

Research Methodology
Researcher conducted Doctrinal type of research to collect proper data and gather appropriate
information. The use of library sources and internet sources has greatly supplemented the
research. Various books pertaining to the subject have been immensely helpful in guiding the
research.

To ensure a quality study of the subject matter, the researcher collected Primary as well as
Secondary type of data. Though primary data is very valuable and precious; still the
importance of the secondary data cannot be overlooked. So, the researcher collected primary

4
data (cases) from various online research journals like SCC online and Manupatra and
secondary data through various books, articles, journals and other sources.

For the purpose of the citation in project OSCOLA mode of citation has been used as the
uniform mode of citation in the entire research project.

History of Stridhan
The term Stridhan has its roots from the Rigvedic period. Its description is found in various
smritis, commentaries and other sages. So, the history of Stridhan can be read under these
subheads.

A text of Manu states that a wife, a son and a slave can have no property that the wealth they
earn is acquired for him to whom they belong. This does not mean that they could not own
property, but as explained by Manu’s commentators, they could not dispose of their property
independently. This view receive support from Gautama who distinctly admits the right of a
woman to hold separate property and provides for its succession. 11 The seeds of Stridhan
appear to have been sown in the Rig Vedic Period. The nuptial gifts, such as ornaments that
the bride wore were recognized as the only item of her personal property. But its ambit was
enlarged during the smriti period.12

A shloka from Manu smriti (9-194) states

Adhyagmadhyavahanikam dattam cha preetikarmaani

Bhraatmaatrapitapraptam shadvidham streedhanam.

It means according to Manu “Adhyagni means whatever has been given at the time of nuptial
fire, Adhyavahanika means whatever given at the time of departure of wife, Dattam Preeti
Karmani means whatever given out of love and affection and given by the father, mother or
brother, all these six types of gifts come under the term Stridhan” 13. The word “ a brother, a
mother or a father” appear to be given by way of illustration, for he says in next verse: “such
property as well as a gift subsequent (anvadheyam) and what was given to her by her
affectionate husband shall go to her offspring even if she dies in his lifetime. 14 He further says
“such ornaments as woman wear during the lives of their husband, the heirs (of the husband)
shall not divide it among themselves; they who divide them among themselves fall deep into
11
Supra 1
12
Vandita Sharma, Gender Justice Vis À Vis the Property Rights of Women A Comparative Study Under Hindu
and Muslim Law (Thesis, University of Jammu, 2016)
13
Dr. U.P.D. Kesari, Modern Hindu Law, Central Law Publication, 10th ed. 2015, p. 461
14
Supra 1

5
sin” (9-200)15 A dictate of Manu which empowered a righteous king to punish as thieves, the
relatives, who appropriated the property of a woman, is quoted in all the later Smritis with
approval16.

According to Narada, “what was given before the nuptial fire, what was presented in the
bridal procession, her husband’s donation, and what has been given by her brother, mother, or
father is termed as the six-fold property of a woman. He further states that “property given to
her by her husband, though pure affection, she may enjoy at her pleasure after his death, or
may give it away, except land or houses.”17

Here it is important to note that the description of Narada’s differs from the Manu only in
mentioning “husband’s donation” in the place of “gift in token of love and affection”. Here
Manu’s Definition has a wider amplitude than Narada’s as it also covers husband’s donation
under the term “preetidattam”.

Vishnu mentioned some more categories of property as Stridhan namely, adhivedanika or

gifts given by the husband to his wife at the time when he took another wife as a kind of
solatium for her wounded feelings; Sulka or her perquisites and anavadeyaka or post nuptial
gifts from her kin in her father’s.

Apastamba here says that the share of wife i.e. Stridhan of woman consists of her ornaments
and the wealth which she may have received from relations18.

The text of Yajnavalkya Smriti is: “what was given to a woman by the father, mother, her
husband or her brother, or received by her at the nuptial fire or presented on her supersession
(adhivedanika) and the like (adi) is denominated woman’s property 19. That which is given
(given to bride) by her bandhus, sulka, anvadhyeka, these her kinsmen (bandhavas) take if
she dies without issue.” Vijnanesvara explains that the term ‘adi’ includes “property which
she may have acquired by inheritance, purchase, partition, seizure, and finding” and says:
“the term ‘woman’s property’ conforms in its import with its etymology and it’s not
technical” According to him, Manu’s six-fold classification is only illustrative. Obviously, he

15
Dr. H. K. Saharay, The Hindu Law of Marriage and Stridhana, R. Cambray & Co. Private Ltd., 6th ed. 2014, p.
247
16
Supra 9
17
Supra 13
18
Dr. U.P.D. Kesari, Modern Hindu Law, Central Law Publication, 10th ed. 2015, p. 461
19
Supra 10

6
is right, for, Manu, Yajnavalkya and all the other Smritis enumerate more than six kinds of
Stridhan.20

The commentator of Vijnaneshwar i.e. Mitakshara and of Jimutvahan i.e. Dayabhag are
important in this respect. According to Vijnaneshwara, the author of Mitakshara Stridhan
includes-

a. Gifts given by the father, mother, husband and brother;

b. Gifts given by the mother and other person at the time of nuptial fire;
c. Gifts given at the time of 2nd marriage or gifts given to earlier wife when the 2 nd wife
was brought in;
d. That property which is obtained through gifts, sale, partition, acquisition and other
means.

It may be submitted that the extension in the meaning of Stridhan by Vijnaneshwara has been
because of the use of word; ‘Adi’ i.e. etc. by Yajnavalkya. Vijnaneshwara interpreting the
word ‘Adi’ etc. remarked that the above list is final and cover other properties also.21

The author of ‘Vyavahar Mayukh’, Nilakantha has also approved of the explanation given by
Vijnaneshwara. For purposes of inheritance Stridhan has been devided into 2 categories-

i. ‘Paribhashik’ which means that which has been accepted by woman expressly.
ii. ‘Aparibhashik’ which means those properties which are owned by a woman
otherwise.

Smritichandrika and Parashar Mdhavya accepted the six kinds of Stridhan mentioned by
Manu, but together with these, the word ‘Adya’ used by Yajnavalkya has been interpreted by
them in restricted manner. They opined that all the properties owned by a woman do not fall
under the category of Stridhan. In fact in these two commentaries the Paribhashik meaning of
Stridhan has been accepted.

According to Vivad Chintamani too Stridhan covers other properties too which do not fall in
the six kinds recognised by Manu. But these Commentaries do not mention meaning given by
Mitakshara. According to Dayabhaga only those properties are referred to as Stridhan which
can be freely alienated by the woman. Dayabhaga interpreted the word ‘Adya’ referred to by

20
Dr. Vijendra Kumar (ed.) Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usages, Bharat Law House, New Delhi, 17th ed.
2014, p. 1206
21
Dr. U.P.D. Kesari, Modern Hindu Law, Central Law Publication, 10th ed. 2015, p. 462-463

7
Vijnaneshwara in Yajnavalkya Smriti as ‘Avam’. According to him such other properties are
covered under Stridhan which have been so mentioned by Yajnavalkya.22

Analysis of concept of Stridhan under Modern Hindu Law

The classical concept of Stridhan and the concept of property under the Stridhan has been
developed from time and now involve a large number of things under this kind of property.
Stridhan is divided into 2 kinds according to Katyayana on the basis of independence of
woman of disposal of it into Saudayika and Asaudayika Stridhan. That which is obtained by a
married woman or by a maiden, in the house of her husband or of her father, from her brother
(from her husband) or form her parents, is termed ‘saudayika’ 23. She has an absolute right
over all the Saudayika Properties. Over Asaudayika Stridhan the husband too has the right of
ownership24. This concept of Asuadayika debt was prevalent prior to the Hindu Succession
Act. After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 under Section 14 the limited estate of woman over
her property was abolished and woman was made the absolute owner of all the property
including the Stridhan. This concept does not hold relevance in the post 1956 period in the
stricter sense as it was before the Act came into force. But, as expressly provided by sub
section (2) of this section, a Hindu female shall not be entitled to hold any property as an
absolute owner if she has acquired the same by way of gift , or under a will or any other
instrument , or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award ,where the terms of
the gift , will or other instrument or the decree order or award prescribe a restricted estate in
such property

According to Judicial Interpretations

According to Privy Council, any property inherited by a Hindu female either from a female or
a male did not constitute Stridhan. But in the State of Bombay, a property received through
inheritance was placed in the category of Stridhan provided' that it was not inherited from a
person in whose family she enters.25

It was laid down by Privy Council in Bhagwan Das v. Maina Bai,26 that property inherited by
a Hindu female from her husband is not Stridhan. Hence such property is inherited by her
22
ibid
23
Available at http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/7870/9/09_chapter%202.pdf accessed on
October 28th, 2017
24
Vibha Sirothiya, Stridhan And Womans’ Estate Under Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act 1956 Available at
https://docuri.com/queue/family-law_59c1d66df581710b2866bfc9_pdf?queue_id=59cb48a4f58171ab1128bba2
accessed on October 28th, 2017
25
Balwant Rao v. Baji Rao, (1920) 7 IA 213.
26
11 MIA 407

8
husband’s collaterals and not by her own heirs. Also, in Shivshanker v. Devi,27 it was laid
down that property received by daughter from her mother is not her Stridhan even if that
property has been the Stridhan of her mother and thus it reverts to the heirs of her mother.
Again in Devimangal v. Mahadeo Pd.,28 the Privy Council further laid down that the share
coming under the possession of a woman after partition is also not Stridhan. Even in
Mitakshara, property received by a widow after partition is not her Stridhan, and after her
death it reverts to her husband's heirs, unless there has been any contract to the contrary.

It has also been held that where a widow retains her possession for more than 12 years over a
joint family property against the heirs, it becomes her Stridhan. 29 Similarly that property is
also included under Stridhan which is obtained by a widow from government with permanent
or alienable rights.30 Where a property is gifted to a woman at the time of her marriage, is
included in Stridhan but if the donor is not known to her previously then the husband has a
superior authority over the property gifted.

According to Dayabhag immovable property gifted to wife by her husband is not Stridhan. 31
However, earnings from Stridhan or savings therefrom fall under the head Stridhan. 32 In the
same way the clothes and ornaments of a woman are also treated as Stridhan.33

The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vinod Kumar Sethi v. Punjab State34 has given an
important decision with respect to Stridhan. According to this High Court whatever has been
received by a bride in marriage or whatever has been gifted to her falls under Stridhan. The
court divided the gifts and dowry given to her under three heads.

First, those items which are given to the bride for her exclusive use.

Secondly, those which are to be used by her and her husband jointly.

Thirdly, those which are to be used by her husband and in laws.

Over the first category she has the exclusive right and she is the exclusive owner thereof;
over those coming under the second category the court's view was that by saying that both the
spouses have the right to use it will not extinguish the right of ownership of the wife even

27
25 All 468
28
34 A 234 (PC)
29
Sham Kunwar v. Wah Kunwar, 29 IA 132
30
Brij Inder Singh v. Janki Kunwar, 5 IA 1
31
Venkat v. Venkat, 1 M 281
32
Laxman v. Kalicharan, (1873) 19 WR 292 PC
33
Harikrishan Das v. Sunder Bibi, 89 IC 424
34
AIR 1982 Punj 372

9
then. In case the marriage breaks or the marriage is dissolved then too the wife has the right
to get back those items and she can keep them in her exclusive possession. Thus according to
the above decision all such gifts and presentations which fall under the first two categories
are termed as Stridhan.

In a later case namely, Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar,35 the Supreme Court disagreed with the
above view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and held that whatever gifts, presentations
and dowry articles are given to a woman in marriage, would be regarded as her absolute
property. All the gold ornaments, clothes and other items of dowry given at the time of
marriage to a Hindu female are her Stridhan and she enjoys complete control over it. 36 The
mere fact that she is living with her husband and using the dowry items jointly does not make
any difference and affect her right of absolute ownership over them. The court observed, it
cannot be said that once a woman enters her matrimonial home she completely loses her
exclusive Stridhan by the same being treated as a joint property of the spouses. In other
words, if this view is taken in its literal sense the consequence Would be to deprive the wife
of the absolute character and nature of her Stridhan and make the husband a co-owner of the
same, such a concept is neither contemplated nor known to Hindu law of Stridhan, nor does it
appeal to pure common sense.37 It cannot also be said that once a married Woman enters her
matrimonial home her Stridhan property undergoes a vital change so as to protect the
husband, from being prosecuted even if he dishonestly misappropriates the same.

So, these are the various views of judiciary which helps us in distinguishing the property as
Stridhan or not.

Sources of Stridhan Property

Property given under Maintenance-
A Hindu female can also be granted property for her maintenance under a family arrangement
or a partition. In Chinnappa Govinda v. Valliammal38, a father-in-law gave some properties
for the maintenance of his widowed daughter-in-law under a maintenance deed.
Subsequently, in 1960 he died. Since he died leaving behind the daughter-in-law his interest
devolved by succession. The daughter-in-law sued for partition so as to get her share of
inheritance. Other members said that she could get her share only if she agreed to include the

35
AIR 1985 SC 628
36
Ibid
37
Ibid
38
AIR 1969 Mad 187

10
properties given to her for maintenance in the suit properties. The Court held that she need
not surrender the properties held by her under the maintenance deed.

Property obtained in partition-

According to Dayabhaga, it is not her Stridhan, and it does not pass, on her death to the
Stridhan heirs but reverts to the sons or grandsons out of whose portion it was taken out.39

According to Mitakshara, the Privy Council held in Debi Mangal v. Mahadeo Prasad,40 that a
share allotted to mother on partition is not her Stridhan but regarded same as the property
inherited by her from her husband 41 in other words the property obtained by a Hindu woman
on partition of the joint family property is not her Stridhan in the sense that on her death it
passes to her Stridhan heirs, but reverts on her death to the next heir of the husband. 42 The
actual point decided in the above case was that there was no substantial difference in
principle between a woman’s property acquired by inheritance and that acquired by partition.

Property given under an award or decree-

In Badri Prasad v. Kanso Devi43, where a partition under an award was subsequently
embodied in a decree, certain properties were allotted to a Hindu female as her share, the
Supreme Court said that section 14(2) did not apply. Their Lordships said that section 14
should be read as a whole. It would depend on the facts of each case whether the same is
covered by sub-section (1) or subsection (2). The crucial words in the subsection are
‘possessed’ and ‘acquired’. The former has been used in the widest possible sense and in the
context of section 14(1) it means the state of owning or having in one’s hand or power.
Similarly, the word acquired has also been given widest possible meaning. The Supreme
Court was of the view that a share obtained by a Hindu female in a partition under section
14(1) even though her share is described as a limited estate in the decree or award.

Property under an agreement or compromise-

The test that if the decree or award is the recognition of pre-existing right then sub-section (1)
will apply and if property is given to the Hindu female for the first time under an award or
decree subsection (2) will apply. It has been applied to the acquisition of property under an

39
Sorolah v. Bhoobun, (1888) 15 Cal 292
40
(1912) 34 All 234
41
Sital Prasad v. Sri Ram, AIR 1944 Luck 450.
42
Kamla Devi v. Bachu Lal AIR 1957 SC 434
43
AIR 1970 SC 1963

11
agreement or compromise. This distinction has been clearly brought out by Mahadeo v.
Bansraji44 and Lakshmichand v. Sukhdevi45.

Property received in gift-

Under the Act, there is no distinction between the gifts received by her from relatives or
strangers and at any stage of her life, and all gifts that she receives will be her absolute
property. Ornaments received by her at the time of her marriage are ordinarily her stridhan
property. A full bench in Vinod Kumar Sethi v. State of Punjab 46 held that dowry and
traditional presents made to a wife at the time of the marriage constitute her stridhan. In
Gopal Singh v. Dile Ram47, a widow having a life estate purported to make a gift of the
property before the Hindu Succession Act 1956 came into force.

Property received under a will-

In Karmi v. Amru48 A Hindu, under a registered will, conferred a life estate on his wife Nihali
, with the direction that after the death of Nihali , properties would devolve on Bhagtu and
Amru , two of his collaterals Nihali took possession and died in 196. On her death her heirs
claimed property on the assertion that after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession
Act, Nihali’s life estate became her full estate. It was held that where only life estate is
conferred under a will, Section 14(2) will apply, and the estate will not become full estate.
But if a will confers on her full estate, she will take absolutely. Properties given under a
settlement to the widow which were to revert to the settlor on his brother on her death, do not
get enlarged into full estate.

Rights of a Woman over her Stridhan

The right depends upon the status and source of the stridhan.

Unmarried status - Any Hindu woman can dispose of the stridhan voluntarily. However, if
she is minor, minority renders the incompetency to the right of disposal49.

Married status: The right of disposal of the Stridhan varies with the nature of the Stridhan.
For this purpose the Stridhan has been divided into saudayika and asaudayika Stridhan.
During marriage the saudayika Stridhan could be alienated freely by her, but asaudayika

44
AIR 1971 ALL 515
45
AIR 1970 Raj 285
46
AIR 1982 P& H 372
47
AIR 1987 SC 2394
48
AIR 1971 SC 745
49
Supra note 21

12
Stridhan could be alienated by her with the consent of her husband only. This rule is subject
to the condition that where husband and wife live together. Where both have departed,
asaudayika Stridhan can be disposed of by the wife even without the consent of her
husband.50 Generally husband has no control over the Stridhan of his wife, yet in emergency
he could still use and dispose the same without the consent of his wife. In calamities or for
religious purpose or if the wife has taken the Stridhan, then its return or repayment depended
upon the wishes of the husband.51

The Hindu woman of her will can restrict her rights in her Stridhan. A Hindu woman is the
full owner and entitled to deal with her Stridhan property as she likes. She can also put any
restriction or curtailment of her rights by her own consent and free will on her Stridhan
property.52

In the case of Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar53 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that Stridhan
property in the custody of the husband doesn’t constitutes a partnership among husband and
wife. A pure and simple entrustment of Stridhan without creating any rights in the husband
except putting the article in the possession doesn’t entitle him to use the same to the
detriment of his wife without her consent. The husband is no more or no less than a pure and
simple custodian acting on behalf of his wife.

During widowhood - During widowhood the woman has an absolute and unrestricted right
of alienation of property, irrespective of the fact whether it has been acquired prior or after
the death of the husband.54 Thus she can alienate the properties without any constraint. So far
as the question of succession to the property of a woman of bad character is concerned, her
bad character does not extinguish the blood relationship.

In Jagdamba v. Saroswati55, it was held that a dasi putri and married daughter inherited equal
shares in their mother's property. This view has also been approved by the Supreme Court.
Succession to property of Devadasis and Dancing girls was carried out according to the
customs and prevailing usages. No coparcenary developed between daughters and mothers.
Hence no daughter could claim partition against her mother.56

50
Shanta Bai Babarao v. Ramchandra, 7 Boa 408 (1959).
51
Prof. U.P.D. Kesari, Modern Hindu Law, 3rd edition, 2001, p. 362
52
B.T. Govindappa v. B. Narsimhaiah (1991) 4 SCC 106
53
(1985) 2 SCC 370
54
Brij inder Singh v. Janaki Kunwar, 1 Cal. LR 318.
55
ILR 1950 Mad 553
56
Gangamma v. Koppamal, 1939 M 139.

13
From Stridhan to Women’s Estate
With the introduction of Section 14 to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 a fundamental change
has been brought about in the concept of women’s estate. Section 14 provides that any
property possessed by a Hindu female, whether acquired before or after the commencement
of this Act shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as limited owner. Sub-section
(1) explains further that ‘property’ in this subsection includes both movable and immovable
property acquired by her by inheritance, partition, gift or will or acquired in lieu of
maintenance or arrears of maintenance or acquired by her own skill or exertion or by
purchase or by prescription or any other manner whatsoever, and also any property held by
her as Stridhan immediately before the commencement of the said Act. It is immaterial
whether it be obtained by inheritance of the deceased husband’s separate property or of his
share in coparcenary property by virtue of the proviso to section 6 of the Act, or by devise of
her deceased husband or gift from a relative or any other person, and whether before, at or
after her marriage. But, as expressly provided by sub section (2) of this section, a Hindu
female shall not be entitled to hold any property as an absolute owner if she has acquired the
same by way of gift, or under a will or any other instrument, or under a decree or order of a
civil court or under an award, where the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the
decree order or award prescribe a restricted estate in such property.

Thus, Section 14 has abolished women’s estate by converting it into stridhan and has
converted existing woman’s estates into full estates. It has introduced fundamental changes in
the traditional Hindu law of property of woman.

The objects of this section are: • To remove all disability of Hindu woman to acquire and deal
with property, that is, all the property that she acquires will be her absolute property. • To
convert existing woman’s estate into full estate.

Conclusion
Access to and control over property is a vital factor that determines a person’s standard of
living, avenues of future income and sense of economic security. Women’s social status and
well-being are therefore directly connected to her ownership of property. Several writers have
pointed to the positive link between women’s access to property and enhanced bargaining
positions both within the community and the family. Women who have property are given
greater respect and looked after better by their relatives. So, the concept of stridhan and
women’s estate here plays a major role. The positive step that was taken in order to secure

14
woman’s right to property was through the inclusion of provisions in the Hindu Succession
Act, 1956 wherein attempts were made to enlarge the concept of limited estate to that of an
absolute estate.

The characteristic feature of stridhan is that the woman is its absolute owner. As such she has
all the rights related to its disposal or alienation. This means that she can sell, gift, mortgage,
lease, exchange, or if she chooses, she can put it on fire. Upon her death her property would
devolve to her own heirs i.e she constitutes an independent stock of decent.

In the opinion of the Apex Court, s. 14 was introduced as a step in the direction of a practical
recognition of the equality of sexes and meant to elevate women from a subservient position
in the economic field, to a higher pedestal, where they could exercise full powers of
enjoyment and dispose of property held by them, as owners, untrammeled by artificial
limitations placed on their rights of ownership by the society in which the will of the
dominant male prevailed to bring about a subjugation of the opposite sex.57

57
Bai Vijaya v. Thakuribai Chelabai, AIR 1979 SC 993, 1003

15
 Bibliography
List of Books

Flavia Agnes, Family Law: FAMILY LAW AND CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS, 2011,
Volume II, Oxford University Press, New Delhi

Satyajeet A. Desai, MULLA HINDU LAW, 17th ed., 2000, Butterworths India, Delhi

Dr. Paras Diwan, FAMILY LAW, 2013, Allahabad Law Agency, Haryana

Sir Dinshaw Fardunji Mulla, HINDU LAW, 11th Ed., 2013, Lexis Nexis, Haryana

Prem Chadha Nath, HINDU LAW, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow.

Jai Prakash, SUPREME COURT ON HINDU lAW, Vinod Publications, Delhi.

Dr Poonam Pradhan Saxena, FAMILY LAW LECTURES- FAMILY LAW II”, 3 rd Ed., 2011,
Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur

Dr. Vijendra Kumar (ed.) Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usages, Bharat Law House,
New Delhi, 17th ed. 2014

Dr. H. K. Saharay, The Hindu Law of Marriage and Stridhan, 6th ed. 2014

Lists of Articles

Jhuma Sen, Matrimonial Property Rights: In India Ready for a law?, Manuptra available at
http://docs.manupatra.in/newsline/articles/Upload/F2587F8B-1162-415A-8E76-
6F4019530939.pdf

Justice Deepak Mishra, Woman Empowerment and Gender Justice

List of Websites

Vaibhav Dixit, “Streedha— The Right of Women”,

http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/stridhan-right-woman/

Vibha Sirothiya, “Stridhan and Woman’s Estate under Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act”,
http://www.498a.org/contents/general/streedhan.pdf

Keerthi S. Nair, “Hindu Women and Changes towards Property Rights”,

http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/hindu-women-changes-towards-property-rights/

v
Sangram S. Kulkarni, “Women’s Right to Property in India”,
http://www.belgaumchamber.com/contact-us/10-womens-right.html

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/171681/8/08%20chapter%203.pdf

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/78233/7/08_chapter%203.pdf

http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/132579/7/07_chapter%203.pdf

vi