ASSIGNMENT

Topic-: Hindu Succession Act On Womens Property Right:

Submitted By

MOHAMMAD ZIYA ANSARI

BALLB (HONS)
SEMESTER-VI
ENROLLMENT NO- GI- 6492
FACULTY NO- 17BALLB- 72
2nd GCT

Submitted To

PROF. MOHAMMAD WASIM ALI SIR

Professor, Faculty of Law

Aligarh Muslim University

ALIGARH-202002 (INDIA)

2019-20
 SYNOPSIS

1-INTRODUCTION.

2-BACKGROUND.

3 BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT OF

1956.

4- COMMENCEMENT OF THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT OF 1956.

5- REFORMS IN SUCCESSION LAW THROUGH STATE

AMENDMENTS.

6- SECTION 14 OF HINDU SUCCESSION ACT 1956.

7- LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA.

8-HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005.

9-CONCLUSION.

10-BIBLIOGRAPHY.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS A DEEP SENSE OF

THANKS & GRATITUDE TO MY PROJECT GUDIE PROFESSOR.

MOHAMMAD WASIM ALI SIR FOR GUIDING ME IMMENSELY

THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE PROJECT.

I ALSO THANKS TO MY SENIORS FOR THEIR MOTIVATION &

SUPPORT. I MUST THANKS TO MY CLASSMATES FOR THEIR
TIMELY HELP & SUPPORT FOR COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT.

LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST, I WOULD LIKE TO THANKS TO ALL

THOSE WHO HELPED ME DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY TOWARDS
THE COMPLETION OF THIS PROJECT.

THANKING YOU

MOHAMMAD ZIYA ANSARI

BALLB-3rd Year GI-6492

17BALLB-72
1-INTRODUCTION1:

It is common knowledge that the Indian society is predominantly patriarchal and the preferential
rights given to men with respect to property, both movable and immovable, are just another
manifestation of the male centric societal structure. Giving women the right to inherit, own, use
and dispose of property is a fairly recent phenomenon.

Although this project deals specifically with the right to property of Hindu women, the absolute
lack of such rights or the presence of only limited rights regarding property, where women are
concerned is common across religions1.
Every person by virtue of being born as human has the inherent right to be treated with dignity and
equality in every aspect of life. However, women though considered as human being is relegated
to a position of subjugation and oppression as she is made to suffer inequality and indignity with
respect to her rights, more particularly her right to property is violated blatantly. The Indian
patriarchal society, intentionally disregards the Hindu women’s right to property, pushing her to a
position of inferiority in social and economic aspects of human relationship.

In ancient times, Hindu women’s property rights were hedged with manifold limitations.
However, attempts have been in India to improve the position of Hindu women with regard to her
succession and inheritance right. The present paper will portray the position of Hindu women’s
right to property from customary law to the present Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 20052.

2-BACK GROUND:
In India, Hindus were governed by Shastric and Customary laws that varied from region to region
resulting in multiplicity of laws with diversified nature being followed in different schools and sub
schools of Hindu law like Mitakshara, Dayabhaga, Nambudri etc. Consequently, property laws
among Hindus were very complex favouring only males and discriminating females. In the entire
history of Hindu law, women’s right to hold and dispose property has been recognized. Two types
of property which she could hold were- Streedhan and Women’s Estate3.

However, the quantum of property held by her was always very meagre. Stridhana was the absolute
property of a female Hindu over which she had full powers to alienate, sell, gift, mortgage, lease
or exchange during her maidenhood and widowhood, but certain restrictions were imposed on her
power, if she was married. On her death, all types of stridhana passed on to her own heirs.
The property in respect of which a Hindu woman was a limited owner constituted her limited
estate or women’s estate or widow’s estate.

1-https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/right-property-hindu-women/
2-www.kanoonreview.com/right-of-women-under-hindu-succession-act-1956.html
3-ibid
The Hindu female owner had limited power of disposal i.e. she could not ordinarily alienate the
corpus except for legal necessity, benefit of estate and for religious duties. On her death, the
women’s estate devolved upon the heir of the last full owner known as reversionary who could
be a male or female.

3- BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT OF

1956:

There were 2 types of women’s Property that were – Streedhan & Women’s Estate

1-Streedhan4-
Streedhan’ means women’s property. According to Smritikars, the Streedhan constituted those
properties which she received by way of gift from the relations which included mostly movable
property such as ornaments, jewellery, and dresses.
The Items covered under Streedhan can be as follows –

• Gifts and bequests from relations

• Gifts and bequests from strangers
• Property acquired by self-exertion and mechanical arts
• Property purchased with Streedhan
• Property acquired by compromise
• Property obtained by adverse
• Property obtained in lieu of maintenance.

2-Women’s Estate5 – The following Conditions Have to meet for property to fall under this
Category –
a-Property obtained by inheritance.
b-Share obtained on partition.
The features of Women’s estate are as follows and implies that –

• It gives women absolute ownership of property.

• She has the full rights of its disposal or alienation.
• She can sell, gift, mortgage, lease, exchange or if she chooses, she can put it on fire,
• Her property can be passed on to her own on heirs on her death.

4-https://vakilsearch.com/advice/hindu-succession-act-about-women-property-rights/
5-ibid.
4-COMMENCEMENT OF THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT OF 1956-:

The idea of the limited estate as propagated by the Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act was
abolished in 1956 by the introduction of the Hindu Succession Act. The Hindu Succession Act
was a progressive act that brought about many reforms, the most important being the granting of
absolute rights to women, over the property that they held. The benefits of the Act were twofold
as held by the Supreme Court in an attempt to put all controversy at rest6.

The Supreme Court declared that as under Section 14 of the Act, the disability of women to hold
property absolutely was removed. In addition to this, it converted the limited estate of a female
owner to an absolute estate irrespective of the fact that the creation of the estate occurred at a point
of time before the enactment of the said legislation, which was retrospective in nature.

It has been said that this Act, “abrogates all the rules of the law of succession hitherto applicable
to Hindus whether by virtue of any text or rule of Hindu law or any custom or usage having the
force of laws in respect of all matters dealt with in the Act. Therefore, no woman can be denied
property rights on the basis of any custom, usage or text and the said Act reformed the personal
law and gave woman greater property rights7.

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is an Act to amend and codify the law relating to in estate
succession among Hindus. The Act applies to all Hindus including Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs and
lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of inheritance and applies to those governed by
Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools as well as other schools such as Murumakkattayam,
Aliyasantana and Namdudri.

The Hindu Succession Act 1956 reformed the personal law of Hindus and conferred upon Hindu
women absolute and full ownership of property instead of limited rights to property as evident
from Section 14(1) of the Act which provides that any property possessed by a female Hindu,
whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as a full owner
thereof and not as a limited owner. The Apex Court in Punithavalli v Ramanlingam AIR 1970 SC
1730 :(1970) 1 SCC 570, held that the right conferred under Section 14 (1) is a clear departure
from Hindu law, text or rules, and the estate taken by a female Hindu is not defeasible by any rule
of Hindu Law and is an absolute ownership. Explanation appended to sub-section (1) of Section
14 enumerates different methods by which woman may have acquired property or would acquire
property and states that ‘property’ includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a
female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of
maintenance, or by gift from any person whether 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 such property held by her as stridhana immediately before the
commencement of this Act8.

6-Supra Note 1, same pg.

7-ibid.
8-Supra Note 2, same pg.
The Act is not retrospective in operation. But section 14 of the Act has qualified retrospective
application. Section 14 (1) confers an absolute right on the widow who acquired the property on
the death of her husband prior to the commencement of the Act and was enjoying only a limited
estate under the customary Hindu law. However, it will convert only those women’s estate into
full estate provided the ownership of property is vested on her and she has possession of the estate
concerned when the Hindu Succession Act 1956 came into force9.

5-REFORMS IN SUCCESSION LAW THROUGH STATE AMENDMENTS:

Acknowledging the discrepancies in regard to Hindu women’s position in Mitakshara coparcenary,

certain states, viz., Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Karnataka in India, took
cognizance, that for economic and social justice to prevail, women must be treated with equality.
Accordingly, the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975 completely and fully
abolished male’s right by birth to property and brought an end to the joint Hindu family system.
No one can claim any interest in ancestral property on ground of birth in the family. By making
amendment to section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Maharashtra and Karnataka in 1986, 1989, 1994, 1994 respectively, declare that daughters
are coparceners in Joint family property10.

As per the Amendment Acts of these four states, daughter of a coparcener in a joint Hindu family
governed by Mitakshara system, is entitled to be a coparcener by birth in her own right in
coparcenary property and be subject to similar liabilities and disabilities as incurred by sons. Thus,
by virtue of these amendments, dual rights have been conferred on daughters, as on one hand, she
becomes coparcenary property right owner in her natal joint family, and on the other hand, she
becomes a member of the marital joint family after her marriage11.

6-SECTION 14 OF HINDU SUCCESSION ACT 1956:

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 brought about a lot of changes. I shall first mention the changes
brought about in the law that has been discussed in the previous section. Section 14 of the HSA
abolished women’s estate. Though reversioners for women’s estate alienated before passing of
act were relevant the old law of succession to Streedhan was abrogated and the new law of
succession was laid down in Sections 15 and 16 of the HAS. The property obtained by
inheritance or through partition was now no longer part of women’s estate. It became her
Streedhan or absolute property12.

9- ibid.
10-ibid.
11-ibid.
12-paper-market.com/free-essays/property-rights-of-women/
The Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937 was repealed the most important section,
however with respect to women’s property is Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act. The
property that was limited estate becomes her full estate by virtue of Section 14 of the HSA. She
can alienate it by gift or otherwise. Before explaining section 14(1), it is important to mention
section 14(2). It retains the power of any person or court to give limited estate to a woman in the
same manner as a limited estate may be given to any other person.

Section 14(1) is subject to 14(2), and it states that any property that is acquired by a female,
except which is covered by sub section (2), before the Act came into force and which is in her
possession when the Act came into force will become her absolute property, and also the
property that she acquires after the commencement of the Act, except for the property covered
under Sub section (2) shall become her absolute property. So, section 14 gives absolute right to
property to the female, to both properties acquired before and after the act13.

For properties acquired before the commencement of the Act, there are two conditions14-

1- Ownership of property must vest in her.

2- She must be in possession of the estate when the Act came into force.

She must be owner of property: The Supreme Court in Gummalappura v Setra laid down that:
‘the word possessed in S. 14 is used in broad sense and in the context means the state of owning
or having in one’s hand or power’. It follows from this that if the female cannot claim any title to
property, then merely by virtue of her possession, she can become its absolute owner. It was laid
down in Eramma v Verupanathat property possessed by a female Hindu, as contemplated by the
section, is clearly property to which she has acquired some kind of title whether before or after
the commencement of the Act. Section 14 does not in any way confer a title on the female Hindu
where she did not, in fact, possess any. Thus, Section 14 cannot be interpreted so as to validate
the illegal possession of a female Hindu, nor does it confer any title on a mere trespasser.

The property must be in her possession: The term possession has been given a very wide
interpretation. It includes both constructive and actual possession. Possession with trespasser has
been considered to be constructive possession and so has possession with mortgagee, licensee or
lessee. Possession has been considered co-extensive with ownership. Thus, whenever the woman
has the ownership of property vested in her, she will be deemed to be in, its possession, and if the
ownership does not vest in her, even if she is in actual or physical possession, she will not be
deemed to be in its possession within the meaning of the section. It was held in Brajabanjhu v
Lubaranithat when a widow holds an estate as an heir of her husband, on the coming into force
of the Act, it becomes her absolute property.

13-ibid.
14-ibid.
7- LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA:
State amendments only brought sweeping reforms in their respective places. But, Hindu women
in other states of India continued to be subjugated to inequality in relation to their property rights
because of the shortcomings of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. To ameliorate the position of Hindu
females, initiative was taken up the Law Commission of India which in its 174th Report on
“Property Rights of Women: Proposed Reforms under Hindu Law” under the Chairmanship of
Justice B. P. Jeevan Reddy made important recommendations, stating that discrimination against
women is writ large in relation to property rights, social justice and demanded that woman should
be treated equally both in the economic and social system15.

The recommendations of the Law Commission of India found reflection in the Hindu Succession
(Amendment) Act, 2005 with the amendment of section 6 and omission of sections 4(2), 23 and
24 which had under Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (original Act) perpetuated gender biasness and
inequality. In the year 2008, the Law Commission of India in its 207th Report under the
Chairmanship of Justice A. R. Lakshmanan, recommended the proposal to amend Section 15 of
the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in case a female Hindu dies in estate leaving her self-acquired
property with no heirs. This proposal has not been incorporated in the Act till date. While broadly
removing the gender discrimination inherent in Mitakshara Coparcenary. The broad features of
the legislation are more or less couched in the same language in each of these Acts. The
amending Acts of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Maharashtra add three sections namely, 29A,
29B, and 29C but Karnataka numbers them as Sections 6A, 6B and 6C of the Act16.

These state enactments provide equal rights to a daughter in the coparcenary property and contain
a non-obstante clause.

Despite the improvements brought about by the Act, it remained predominantly gender
discriminatory, especially where inheritance rights of daughters were concerned. It was amended
in 2005 to give equal rights to daughters in separate property as well as coparcenary property left
by the father. The disability of women inheriting their patrimonial property was taken away by
Section 6 of the amended Act17.

The right accrued to a daughter in the ancestral property, by virtue of the Amendment Act, 2005
is absolute, except in the circumstances provided in the amended Section-6. The excepted
categories to which new Section-6 is not applicable are two, namely, (1) where the disposition or
alienation including any partition which took place before 20-12-2004 and (2) where the
testamentary disposition of the property was made before 20-12-200418.

15-Supra Note -2, same pg.

16-ibid.
17-Supra Note-1, same pg.,
18-ibid.
8- THE HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT,2005:
The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 after having been passed in both the Houses of the
Parliament on August 2005, received the assent of the President of India on 5th September 2005
and came into force from 9th September, 2005 incorporating the reforms suggested in the 174th
Report of the Law Commission of India. The Amendment Act, 2005 deleted Section 4(2) of the
Hindu Succession Act 1956, and paved the way for women’s inheritance in agricultural lands
equally to that of males. The amendment has done away with the discriminatory state-level tenurial
laws and benefited many women who are dependent on agriculture for their sustenance.
The Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005 has addressed a very pertinent matter relating to
rights of daughters in the Mitakshara coparcenary and thus elevated daughter’s position by
amending section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act 195619.

The amended Section 6 deals with devolution of interest in coparcenary property. Section 6(1)
provides that the daughter of a coparcener in a joint family governed by the Mitakshara law
shall, on and from the date of commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005,
by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son. She shall have the
same rights and be subjected to the same disabilities in the coparcenary property as that of a son
and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara Coparcenary shall be deemed to include a reference to a
daughter of a coparcener.
Any disposition or alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which
had taken place before the 20th December, 2004, shall not be affected or invalidated by the
provision in Section 6(1) [Proviso to section 6(1)].
Further any property to which female Hindu becomes entitled by virtue of sub-section (1) of
section 6, shall be held by her with the incidents of coparcenary ownership and shall be regarded,
as property capable of being disposed of by her by will and other testamentary disposition [section
6(2)].

Section 23 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 has been omitted by the Amendment Act, 2005, as
a result of which, at present all daughters, both unmarried and married, are entitled to same rights
as sons to reside in and to claim partition of the parental dwelling home. The Amendment Act,
2005 has also omitted section 24 which had disqualified certain widows on remarriage from
succeeding to the property of in estate. Now the widow of a pre-deceased son or the widow of a
pre-deceased son of a pre-deceased son or widow of the brother can inherit the in-estate’s property
even if she has remarried. Moreover, the Amendment Act, 2005 has added some more heirs to the
list of Class I heirs who are daughter’s daughter, daughter’s son’s daughter and son’s daughter’s
daughter and daughter’s son.
This was seen a landmark Amendment as now married woman could inherit their father’s property
which was previously only enjoyed by the male members of the family. The Amendment made to
Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act that deals with the Devolution of Coparcenary property
have made this possible and women can also inherit property as coparceners20.

19-Supra Note-2, same pg.

20-ibid.
9- CONCLUSION:

From a predominantly male centric set of property rights, the law has evolved over time to give
first limited then absolute rights to women where property is concerned. It was the previously held
view that giving women the right to property would lead them to have too much freedom and a
sense of their own importance that would lead to the eventual breakdown of the societal structure
and lead to utter chaos. Such views are now known to be erroneous. The various rights and
liabilities of women holding property are as of now at par after the amendment of the Hindu
Succession Act 1956, in 2005. However, the reality is far from the black letter of the law since
even now only one in ten women are aware of the rights, they are capable of exercising. It is the
duty of the legally aware people in society to ensure that this deficiency is remedied. Nevertheless,
these laws are a significant step forward in achieving gender equality as envisaged by the framers
of our constitution, the founding fathers of our nation.

Even though India as a country has come a long way in its 70+ years of independence, it has seen
immense growth in terms of its financial and Business sectors with more and more of its rural
population getting educated, urban and progressive but still within this story of success lies woven
tales of discrimination inequality injustice not only on the basis of caste or religion but even on
the basis of gender a country with moderate sex ratio reservation still persist as to the other gender
and discrimination is rampant because of pre-existing notions of patriarchy and male supremacy
we have come a long way in solving this issue through education engagement discussion and even
legal remedies put to avoid such discrimination Right for women in property is just the beginning
there lies so much left to go ahead for a truly empowered India .
Now, the married woman also can inherit the property of their father’s which was before enjoyed
by only the male members of the house or family. The Section 6 in the Hindu Succession Act
demonstrate with the decentralization of Coparcenary property made it possible and now women
can retrieve the property as coparceners.

10- BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1-https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/right-property-hindu-women/
2-https://vakilsearch.com/advice/hindu-succession-act-about-women-property-rights/
3-http://paper-market.com/free-essays/property-rights-of-women/
4-http://www.kanoonreview.com/right-of-women-under-hindu-succession-act-1956.html