When a Hindu Woman Dies Intestate: Who Inherits Her Self-Acquired Property?

The Supreme Court in Omprakash v. Radhacharan Civil Appeal No. 3241 of 2009 Decided On: 05.05.2009 clarified an important principle regarding succession to the property of a Hindu female dying intestate. The Court explained that the Hindu Succession Act does not create a separate rule for self-acquired property of a woman outside the framework of Section 15 of Hindu Succession Act. Instead, one must carefully read Section 15(1) of Hindu Succession Act and Section 15(2) of Hindu Succession Act.

Print Page

Female Hindu Intestate Succession: The 5-Step Rule You Must Know

 

Memorize Female Hindu Intestate Succession as a 5-step ladder plus 2 exceptions.

A female Hindu dying intestate succeeds in this order: children and husband, husband’s heirs, parents, father’s heirs, mother’s heirs. Section 16 simply tells you that the earlier class excludes the later class, and heirs in the same class take together.

Print Page

Questions and answers on law (Part 69)

 Q 1:- What are rights of accused under Indian law?

Ans:- In India, the rights of the accused are enshrined in various legal documents, primarily the Constitution of India and the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Here are some key rights of the accused:

Fundamental Rights:

1) Right to Equality (Article 14): The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

2) Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21): No person can be deprived of their life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

3) Right against Self-Incrimination (Article 20(3): The accused cannot be compelled to answer questions or provide evidence that could be used against them in court.

Print Page

What are principles for inheritance of property of female hindu acquired by her under compromise decree?

In the present case, it is not disputed that Rajathiammal died intestate without leaving any son or daughter or children of pre-deceased son or daughter. Hence, the property would devolve on the heirs of her father. It is contended that she got the property because of the compromise decree and, therefore, the property is not inherited by her from her father or mother. This submission in our view, is without any substance. She was daughter of Sivabagyammal and, therefore, she was entitled to inherit the property of her maternal grandmother as her mother had expired. As some dispute was raised by the other heirs, a suit was filed. In that suit, rights of Rajathiammal were recognized and compromise decree was passed in her favour. Result is - she got the property as daughter of her mother. That means, she got the property not from the husband or father-in-law, but from her mother side. In that state of affairs, the heirs of her father, that is, heirs of S.V. Venugopala Chettiar would be entitled to inherit her property in view of Section 15(2)(a) of the Act.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 6626 of 1995

Decided On: 08.08.2003

V. Dandapani Chettiar Vs. Balasubramanian Chettiar (Dead) by Lrs. and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.B. Shah and AR. Lakshmanan, JJ.

Print Page

What are principles for inheritance of self acquired property of female hindu dying intestate?

 The law is silent with regard to self- acquired property of a woman. Sub-section (1) of Section 15, however, apart from the exceptions specified in Sub-section (2) thereof does not make any distinction between a self-acquired property and the property which she had inherited. It refers to a property which has vested in the deceased absolutely or which is her own. The self-acquired property of a female would be her absolute property and not the property which she had inherited from her parents.

10. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that Sub-section (1) of Section 15 of the Act would apply and not the Sub-section (2) thereof.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 3241 of 2009 

Decided On: 05.05.2009

 Omprakash  Vs. Radhacharan

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.B. Sinha and Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.

Print Page

How to ascertain the legal heirs of female Hindu for succession to her property if her husband pre-deceased her?

The only reason why the High Court has allowed the second appeal is on the ground that the appellant is not an heir of her mother-in-law under the Hindu Succession Act.

3. This finding proceeds on a misconception of the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act. Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act provides general rules of succession in the case of female Hindus. Under Sub-section (1), the property of a Hindu female dying intestate shall devolve (a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband; (b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband. Gomathi Ammal does not have any heirs falling under (a). Therefore, we have to examine who are the heirs of her husband. The heirs of a male Hindu are set out in the Schedule to the Hindu Succession Act. Heirs in Class I include a widow of a pre-deceased son. The appellant fits this description. But the High Court has held that when Sesha Iyengar, the husband of Gomathi Ammal died, their son Venkatarama Iyengar was alive. So the appellant cannot be called the widow of a pre-deceased son.

4. In order to decide who are the heirs of a female Hindu under category (b) of Section 15(1), one does not have to go back to the date of the death of the husband to ascertain who were his heirs at that time. The heirs have to be ascertained not at the time of the husband's death but at the time of the wife's death because the succession opens only at the time of her death. Her heirs under Section 15(1)(b) will have to be ascertained as if the succession to her husband had opened at the time of her death. Thus, if at the time of Gomathi Ammal's death, there is any heir of her husband who fits the description in the schedule of being the widow of his pre-deceased son, she will be one of the heirs entitled to succeed. The status of the heir must be determined at the time of the death of the female whose heirs are being ascertained. The appellant was the widow of a pre-deceased son on the date when Gomathi Ammal died. Therefore, the learned single Judge was not right in coming to the conclusion that the appellant is not an heir of Gomathi Ammal.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

C.A. No. 1944 of 1998 

Decided On: 03.04.1998

 Seethalakshmi Ammal Vs. Muthuvenkatarama Iyengar and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.V. Manohar and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.

Citation: AIR 1998 SC 1692

Print Page

Whether Hindu woman who is in illegal possession of property without title can obtain absolute ownership as per S 14(1) of Hindu succession Act?

 It is true that the appellant was in possession of
Eran Gowda's properties but that fact alone is not
sufficient to attract the operation of Section 14. The

property possessed by a female Hindu, as
contemplated in the section, is clearly property to
which she has acquired some kind of title whether
before or after the commencement of the Act. It may be
noticed that the Explanation to Section 14(1) sets out
the various modes of acquisition of the property by a
female Hindu and indicates that the section applies
only to property to which the female Hindu has
acquired some kind of title, however restricted the
nature of her interest may be. The words “as full owner
thereof and not as a limited owner” as given in the last
portion of subsection
(1) of Section 14 clearly suggest
that the legislature intended that the limited ownership
of a Hindu female should be changed into full
ownership. In other words, Section 14(1) of the Act
contemplates that a Hindu female who, in the absence
of this provision, would have been limited owner of the
property, will now become full owner of the same by
virtue of this section. The object of the section is to
extinguish the estate called limited estate or “widow's
estate” in Hindu law and to make a Hindu woman, who
under the old law would have been only a limited
owner, a full owner of the property with all powers of
disposition and to make the estate heritable by her
own heirs and not revertible to the heirs of the last
male holder. The Explanation to subsection
(1) of
Section 14 defines the word “property” as including
“both movable and immovable property acquired by a
female Hindu by inheritance or devise …”. Subsection
(2) of Section 14 also refers to acquisition of property.
It is true that the Explanation has not given any
exhaustive connotation of the word “property” but the
word “acquired” used in the Explanation and also in
subsection
(2) of Section 14 clearly indicates that the
object of the section is to make a Hindu female a full
owner of the property which she has already acquired
or which she acquires after the enforcement of the Act.
It does not in any way confer a title on the female
Hindu where she did not in fact possess any vestige of
title. It follows, therefore, that the section cannot be
interpreted so as to validate the illegal possession of
female Hindu and it does not confer any title on a mere
trespasser. In other words, the provision of Section
14(1) of the Act cannot be attracted in the case of a

Hindu female who is in possession of the property of
the last male holder on the date of the commencement
of the Act when she is only a trespasser without any
right to property.
(emphasis supplied)

REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 226 OF 2010

AJIT KAUR @ SURJIT KAUR  Vs DARSHAN SINGH

Rastogi, J.
Dated:April 04, 2019
Citation: 2019 SCC ONLINE SC 470

Print Page

Whether female hindu should be in possession of suit property for acquiring ownership rights over property?

Possession,  physical or constructive or  in  legal
sense, on the date of coming into operation of the  Act  is
not  the sine-qua-non for the acquisition of full  ownership
in  property by the Hindu female. The expression  "possessed
of" used in s. 14(1) pertains to the acquisition of a  right
or  interest in the property and not to physical  possession
acquired by force or without any legal right. The expression
"whether  acquired before or after the commencement  of  the
Act"  used  in s. 14(1) makes it evident that  any  property
possessed by a Hindu female whether acquired before or after
the commencement of the Act, would be held by her as a full
owner thereof and not as a limited owner. If the legislature
had  not contemplated a Hindu widow becoming possessed of  a
property by virtue of an acquisition after the commencement
of  the  Act the aforesaid expression would  not  have been
used.

Supreme Court of India

Jagannathan Pillai vs Kunjithapadam Pillai & Ors on 21 April, 1987


Equivalent citations: 1987 AIR 1493, 1987 SCR (2)1070





Bench: Thakkar, M.P. (J)

Print Page