Women’s Right to Property under Hindu

Law
Introduction

 The right of Hindu women to inherit property has been restricted

from the beginning.
o In ancient times, women were not considered equal to men,
their rights were also not equal to the male members of the
society.
 The denial of property rights to women can be traced back to
religious practices, as they were considered incompetent to take
part in sacrificial rituals and were prohibited from offering funeral
cakes for the spiritual salvation of the common ancestor.

Woman’s Property Right under Mitakshara and Dayabhaga

Schools

 The Mitakshara School was followed throughout India except for the
Eastern part of India whereas Dayabhaga School was followed
throughout the Eastern India especially in the parts of Bengal and
Assam.
 In Mitakshara School property rights of the women were restricted
to a great extent; women were believed to never be able to become
a coparcener.
 The widow of a deceased coparcener could not get his share and
was not allowed to enforce a partition of his husband's share against
his brothers.
 Dayabhaga school on the other hand was somewhat lenient, it
differs in the matters of inheritance by women and women as heirs
from Mitakshara school.
o Widows had more property rights in Dayabhaga School than in
Mitakshara school, a widow has the right to inherit her
deceased husband's share and could enforce a partition
against his brothers.
o Although the Dayabhaga school of thought offers a certain
degree of freedom, it still imposed limitations. For example, in
cases where a widowed woman without sons passes away, her
husband's share does not transfer to her daughters but is
inherited by the nearest male heir instead.

Hindu Woman’s Right After the Hindu Succession Act,

1956

 In the contemporary age of evolving norms, it is acknowledged that

in order to foster the nation's development, women should be
granted equal status and rights alongside men.
  Hence, the first major legislation named Hindu Succession Act, 1956
(HSA) recognizing women's rights to inheritance of property came
into existence, since then with the passage of time women's right of
property inheritance is getting evolved.

Section14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956

 Section 14 - Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute

property -

(1) Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before

or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full
owner thereof and not as a limited owner.

Explanation.― In this sub-section, “property” includes both movable

and immovable property acquired by a female Hindu by inheritance or
devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of
maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before,
at or after her marriage, or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or
by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any such
property held by her as stridhana immediately before the commencement
of this Act.

(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any property

acquired 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 the provisions of Section 14 of HSA, absolute rights are

conferred to women in any property possessed by her.
 The Act gives unfettered rights to women, including the right to
dispose the property off. The property can be both movable as well
as immovable.
 Section 14 of HSA grants any Hindu woman the ability to use her
property without the husband’s, father’s, etc. approval or consent.
She is free to transfer her property at any time, and she is free to
spend the proceeds in any way she chooses.

Case Laws

 Punithavalli Ammal v. Ramalingam and Anr. (1964)

o The Supreme Court held that Section 14(1) gives absolute
right to women, and it cannot be curtailed in any manner by
making any presumption or interpretation of the law.
o It was further held that the date of possession of such
property is irrelevant as women in possession of the property
before the enactment of the provision would now be given
absolute rights which were previously limited.
  Agasti Karuna v. Cherukuri Krishnaiah (2000)
o The Andhra Pradesh High Court held in this case that women
had absolute right over the property of the deceased husband
under Section 14 of HSA.
o Any transfer or alienation of such property by the wife after
the commencement of HSA cannot be challenged by any of
the heirs.

Section 15 of HSA

 The general guidelines for the transfer of property intestate of a

Hindu are covered in Section 15 of the 1956 Act. It specifies how the
devolution will occur:
o Firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of
any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband.
o Secondly, upon the heirs of the husband.
o Thirdly, upon the mother and father.
o Fourthly, upon the heirs of the father.
o Lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

Section 30 of HSA

 According to Section 30 of HSA, any Hindu female has the entire

legal authority to sell her belongings either through intestate or
testamentary succession as per the right to full ownership.
 Previously only Hindu men were permitted to make a will to dispose
of their possessions. Hindu women now have the same right.

Hindu Woman’s Right after Hindu Succession

(Amendment) Act, 2005

The Amendment of 2005

 Prior to the Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005, sons enjoyed

rights over the deceased father’s property, whereas daughters could
do so only till she was unmarried.
 Following the 174th Law Commission Report’s recommendations, the
Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 was passed and made
significant changes to the 1956 Act.
o Now married women could inherit their father’s property
which was previously only enjoyed by the male members of
the family.
 In other words, women could now become coparceners in a
succession of the property of the patriarch and hold equal
depositionary rights to the property.
 The Amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act that
deals with the Devolution of Coparcenary property has made this
possible, and women can also inherit property as coparceners.
Section 6 of HSA

 The 2005 Amendment repealed the long-standing discriminatory

practice of excluding women from the coparcenary system. It was
done by amending Section 6 of HSA.
o As per Section 6(1) of amended HSA, like sons, the daughter
of a coparcener will by birth become a coparcener in her own
right.
o This way Section 6(1) gives equal rights and liabilities to both
sons and daughters of the coparcener.

Share in coparcenary property

 According to Section 6(3) of HSA, a deceased coparcener’s stake in

the assets of a Hindu Undivided Family will pass through
testamentary or intestate succession. The devolution must occur in
a manner that:
o The daughter has the same share as that of a son.
o Pre-deceased woman coparcener’s share goes to her surviving
children similarly in the same way it was given to her.

Hindu Adoption and Maintenace Act, 1956

 Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenace Act, 1956 (HAMA)

also provides for daughter in law’s claim to maintenance from her
father-in-law, if she is unable to maintain herself from her own
earnings or property, and where she does not have any property,
she is unable to obtain maintenance from her husband, parents or
children.
 Any obligation under sub-section (1) of Section 19 as mentioned
above shall not be enforceable if the father-in-law has not the
means to do so from any coparcenary property in his possession out
of which the daughter-in- law has not obtained any share, and any
such obligation shall cease on the remarriage of the daughter-in-
law.

Conclusion

 In modern times, a country's progress is contingent on ensuring that

its women are not left behind. Women should enjoy equal rights and
opportunities as men, not only in theory but also in reality. Only
when a nation truly upholds gender equality in both principle and
practice can it truly embark on a path of development.
 Now that the daughters have been recognized as coparceners, their
interest in the ancestral property is now protected, since the
daughters now also have right by birth in the ancestral property as
the sons, she cannot be denied her share in the property by
testamentary disposition by the father.