Who Has The Right Over A Woman's Property?

There have been discussions about how a male member's property is treated upon his demise. But, what happens to a woman's property in a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)?

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, lays down the following:

As per the law, every Hindu woman is a full owner of the movable and immovable property she has acquired before or after the commencement of this Act. A property which a woman has inherited, received after property partition, a property that belongs to her in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance, a property received as a gift during her marriage or she may have bought it out of her own income will be her full property. Even the 'stridhan' she may have brought along post her marriage also remains her full property and she has every right over it.

Also read: These Are Your Rights Under The Hindu Undivided Family

However, it shall not 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,” says the law.

Upon a woman's demise intestate, wherein the woman has not left behind a will, the following is the general course of law.

The first preference is given to the offspring, which also includes children of any pre-deceased son or daughter. The husband is also an equally preferred successor.

Also read: This Women's Day, Know Your Succession Rights

In the absence of the above, the second preferred successors are the heirs of the husband and the woman's parents are the third. It has been often pointed out that the law is unduly partial towards patriarchy. But, the law did introduce exceptions as well.

Take this case as an example.

In the Omprakash Versus Radhacharan Case in 2009, the Supreme Court upheld that the woman's property should move to her husband's heirs. However, this would have been a difficult situation given that the woman was widowed within three months of her wedding and was turned out of her husband's home. Thereafter, she lived with her own parents. Upon her death, her husband's sisters claimed her property because the law says that in the absence of children and husband, the next successors are the husband's heirs which includes his sisters. However, her wealth was entirely self-acquired and nothing was built using her husband or father-in-law's money. But the Supreme Court stuck to the law and the property was transferred to the husband's heirs.

However, the 2007 Law Commission Report did the society quite a favour. It was debated that the law makers back then may not have taken such a provision as an anomaly. Or, women with self-acquired property in 1956 was unheard of and therefore the law was shortsighted. Hence, two exceptions were introduced. This would help the situation by identifying the source of self-acquired property.

Also read: Interpreting The SC Order On Women's Right To Ancestral Property

Here's how:

Firstly, “any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the father.”

Secondly, “ any property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband or from her father-in-law shall devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any predeceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the heirs of the husband.”

With this provision, it becomes clear that a woman's property in a similar case would be treated on the base of the source of the acquisition of such a property.

The fourth preference is given to the heirs of the father and lastly, in the absence of this class of heirs, it can be rightfully claimed by the heirs of the mother.