RESEARCH PROJECT

PROPRIETARY RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN ANCIENT INDIA

SUBMITTED BY:
SHAIVYA SINHA
PRN NO. 24010223049
DIVISION- D
PROGRAMME- BA.LLB.
BATCH- 2024-29
SEMESTER 1 (2024-25)

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:

DR. GEETIKA GUPTA
COURSE IN-CHARGE, HISTORY I- HISTORY OF LAW AND LEGAL
INSTITUTIONS IN ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL INDIA
SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, NOIDA

SUBMITTED ON:

WEDNESDAY, 21 AUGUST 2024

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Serial Title Page

Number Number

1. Cover page 1

2. Table of Contents 2

3. Abstract 3

4. Introduction 4

5. Research Objectives 5

6. Research Methodology 6

7. Analysis 7-9

8. Conclusion 10

9. References and Bibliography 11

2
 ABSTRACT

In this paper, I seek to elaborate on the proprietary rights of women in the ancient Indian
society. It is usually deemed that since most of the women’s rights have been recognised not
long ago, women in earlier times did not have any rights and were treated as mere objects- as
property of first their fathers and then later their husbands. While a part of it is correct, to label
women as a section of society that had absolutely no rights in terms of property is not
pragmatic. In this paper, I shall elaborate on how women enjoyed certain rights in the ancient
Indian society in terms of owning and inheriting property and how these rights empowered
them.

3
 INTRODUCTION

The term ‘proprietary rights’ refers to the rights of individuals to own or inherit property. In the
modern Indian society, every individual has the right to own property. However, this was not
always the case. In the ancient Indian society, women did not have absolute or concrete laws
that would guarantee their proprietary rights.

In ancient India, these rights were closely influenced by religious and social factors. Family
values too, played a vital role in determining the nature of these rights. In a primarily patriarchal
society, it was difficult for women to gain absolute control over property as male offsprings
were generally preferred more than their female counterparts. Irrespective of this, women did
enjoy certain rights pertaining to ownership and inheritance of property.

Moreover, these rights were not free from variations. Different scriptures prescribed distinct
sets of rights to women with respect to property. Regional variations are also observed with the
southern Indian women enjoying greater privileges due to the society there viz-a-viz the women
of north India.

4
 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

This research paper aims to:

• examine the extent of rights pertaining to ownership and inheritance of property that
were available to women in the ancient Indian society

• summarise the variations observed in the rights that were available to the women of the
ancient Indian society as we move from northern India to southern India

5
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For writing this research paper, I have referred to various secondary sources that were available
to me. Secondary sources are efficient for writing papers as they greatly reduce time and effort
by providing us with details relating to first-hand or primary sources. They include books,
journals, articles, et cetera. I have referred to both electronic and traditional secondary sources
for writing this paper. I have used books, websites and journal articles for writing this paper. I
have accessed the journal articles used here through various online databases. The books used
by me have been provided by my college library.

6
 ANALYSIS

The property of women- ownership and inheritance:

Women’s rights with respect to property ownership and inheritance have not been constant in
the ancient Indian society but have rather been going through surges of ups and downs.
However unlike most ancient societies, the Indian society never failed to recognise the
proprietary rights of women whether married, unmarried or widowed.

Brahminical scriptures, like the Rigveda and the Taittiriya Samhita, give us details about the
position of women viz-a-viz property rights.

“..we find a reference to parinahya , that is the gifts to the bride by her father at her wedding.
The Taittiriya Samhita describes these as the bride's own property." (Darshini, 2012, p. 134)

Thus, women were allowed to retain these gifts that they received at the time of their wedding
in the form of property.

We also find references to stridhana in the Arthashastra.

“Stridhana gave the wife certain rights which were not of the nature of usufruct only; for she
could use this property in any manner she liked for her own maintenance or the maintenance
of her son or daughter-in-law.” (Darshini, 2012, p. 135)
Stridhana referred to gifts given to a woman at the time of her wedding by her parents, relatives
or brothers. Furthermore, gifts given to a woman by her husband and her in-laws were also
included in stridhana. It could also be retained by women after the death of their husbands.

According to the Manusmriti, upon the death of the mother, her property would be equally
divided among her children- both sons and daughters. Therefore, we observe that even the
daughters could obtain a share in the property that was held by their mothers.
“ ..Manu enjoins that "When the mother has died, all the uterine brothers and the uterine sisters
shall equally divide the mother's estate". Elsewhere however he states that whatever may be
the separate property of the mother that would become alone. Further, according to Manu the
anvadheya (subsequent) gifts and the gifts made to a woman by a loving husband shall go to
her offspring, if she dies while her husband is alive.” (Darshini, 2012, p. 136-137)

7
The Gautama Dharmasutra however, empowered the position of an unmarried woman by
prescribing that she was to be made the first nominee of the property of her mother upon her
death. The stridhana, although belonging to the women, could be utilised by their husbands. If
the couple was married under the criteria of the first four marriages prescribed by the
Brahminical texts, the husband could exercise unlimited control over his wife’s property.
However, if they were married under the criteria of the latter four marriages, the husband had
to be subjected to certain restraints. The Manusmriti, further protecting the interests of the
women, stated that the relatives had no right to use the stridhana. (Darshini, 2012, p. 136)

Further, we also have evidences of joint ownership of property. In this concept, we see both the
husband and the wife as a sole entity, capable of owning property together. This also provides
an added benefit of inculcating a mutual duty to respect and care for each other in case of
couples. This concept also gave the women the right to be maintained or the right of
maintenance which she could exercise till the time her husband expires.

As for inheritance of patrilineal property, daughters could only claim a share if she were
brotherless. Daughters could also be appointed as nominees by their fathers, however in such
cases theirs sons would have to perform all duties that of a son.

8
Regional variations with respect to the proprietary rights of women:

As compared to Northern India, women in Southern India enjoyed greater rights pertaining to
property. Since the influence of Brahminical texts was not as greatly spread in the southern
regions as compared to the north, the austerity of the prescriptions pertaining to the proprietary
rights of women as mentioned in those texts was reduced to a significant extent, causing certain
restrictions and restraints to loosen up, thus giving them more freedom.

In the Tamil region, specially, women owned property and had the right to handle this property.
They could sell it or give them as gifts. This right was mostly enjoyed by the women of the
ruling elite classes or royal families but we also have evidences of inscriptions which talk about
women from non-elite backgrounds making grants to temples by giving them a share of or the
whole of their property to them. (Mukund, 1999)

Moreover, in most communities of Tamil Nadu, the natal family provided for the daughter’s
needs both before and after marriage. The daughter received several gifts from her family
especially during special occasions of pregnancy and childbirth. These gifts were to be retained
as stridhana by the women. (Mukund, 1999)

With respect to the matrilineal traditions in the South, women here in general enjoyed more
autonomy as compared to the women of the North. The control of the extended household was
under the control of a matriarch. They could have a share in its revenue and could also retain
unilineal succession to property designated for them. However, by the middle of the nineteenth
century, these privileges slowly started to fade away and began the inception patrilineal and
patriarchal society. This was based on the naturalistic assumption that women, as a race, were
weaker than men and thus they were both subordinate to and dependent on men. Therefore,
property owning women started to diminish since then on. (Mukund, 1999)

9
 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we can say that women in the ancient Indian society did enjoy proprietary rights.
Even if these rights were not absolute or very strong, they helped in empowering and
safeguarding women and their interests. These rights varied greatly. There were regional
variations as well as variations in prescription when it came to proprietary rights of women.
Different scriptures shed light on varied aspects of these rights and their application too differed
as we moved from the north to the south of India. However, even so, we cannot disagree that
these rights attributed a sense of autonomy to women, something that reflects itself a lot in the
laws that we have today. Therefore, it is safe to say that these customs of property owning laid
down a foundation for women in later periods to base their proprietary rights upon thereby
making the right to property a right that is devoid of any biasness towards sex.

10
 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

References:

• Mukund, K. (1999). Women’s property rights in south india: A review. Economic and
Political Weekly, 34(22), 1352–1358.

• Darshini, P. (2012). PROPRIETARY RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN ANCIENT INDIA

(600 B.C. – 100 A.D.). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 73, 132–143.

Bibliography:

• Websites:

o Halder, D., & Jaishankar, K. (n.d.). Property rights of hindu women: A

feminist review of succession laws of ancient, medieval, and modern

India. Journal of Law and Religion, 24(2), 663–687.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0748081400001740

o Rai, D. (2020, November 4). Plight and struggles of Hindu women in the field

of property rights : A historical study. iPleaders.

https://blog.ipleaders.in/plight-struggles-hindu-women-field-property-rights-

historical-study/

• Books:

o Singh, U. (n.d.). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India. Pearson.

11