2/10/2016

Home

WomensRightonproperty

#Ask_LB

CaseBriefs

Interviews

Internships/jobs

LegalBlocJournal(ISSN:23950277)

Opportunities

ResearchBlog

OurTeam
Enterkeyworks

LATESTPOSTS

ContactUs
SEARCH

February9,2016ATalkonStrategiesofNuclearProliferation:HowStatesLearnedtoLoveGettingtheBomb@CPR

HOME/MISCELLANEOUS/RESEARCHBLOG/WOMENSRIGHTONPROPERTYBEFOREANDAFTERHINDUSUCCESSION(AMENDMENT)ACT,2005

WomensRightonpropertyBeforeandafterHinduSuccession
(Amendment)Act,2005
WomensRightonpropertyBeforeandafterHinduSuccession(Amendment)Act,2005
Submittedby:RiyaSingh
[LegalBlocJournal(ISSN:23950277):Vol.1Issue1]
ABSTRACT
Thismonographexplainsrightsofwomenonproperty.Itdealswiththepositionofwomenstartingfromancientperiodtilltoday.Itexplainshow
womenhavealwaysbeentreatedasadisadvantageoussectionofthesociety.Throughouthistorywomenhavelackedpowersocially,economically,
culturallyandpolitically.ItfurtherexplainsthatinspiteoftheConstitutionofIndiaprohibitingdiscriminationonthegroundofsex,womenare
discriminatedeveninLegislations.Lawshavealwaysbeenforthebettermentofmenandkeepinginmindtheirrightsaswomenareassumedtobe
dependentonmen.So,theyhavebeenneglectedsincelong.Aspropertygivespowerandenhancesselfconfidenceofaperson.So,propertyrightsare
verymuchimportantespeciallyfortheupliftmentofwomeninthesociety.PriortotheActof1956,Hindusweregovernedbytheconservative
religiouslawsinwhichwomenhadnopowertobeontheirownandtheyhadnorightinproperty.EventhoughLegislationsweremadebutallwerein
favourofmalemembersofthesocietyandlateronsomelegislationsweremadewhichtalkedaboutwomenspropertyrightsbuttheyhadverylimited
scopeandwerefullofdefectsandanomalies.Inalllawsrightsofwidowinhusbandspropertywereceasedincaseofremarriage.Theyhadnorightto
alienatetheproperty;theyweremereusersoftheproperty.Womenhadnorightinancestralproperty,theyhadnocoparcenaryrights,andmarried
womenhadnorightinfatherspropertyorondwellinghome.AsIndiaisacountrywhichisfullofdiversitiesandlawschangesfromplacetoplace.So,
peopleweregovernedunderdifferentlawsdependingontheplacewheretheywereresiding.Basedonthat,theyweregovernedunderdifferent
schoolslikeDayabhagaforpeoplelivinginBengal,MayukhaforpeoplelivinginBombay,KonkanforpeoplelivinginGujrat,Marumkkatyamand
NambudriforpeoplelivinginKeralaandMitaksharaforpeoplelivinginrestofthecountry.Thesedemarcationsandvariationsmadethelawsmore
complicating.TherewereloopholesanddiscriminationwithwomenintheLegislationthathasbeenresolvedbytheAmendmentinHinduSuccession
Act1956intheyear2005andwomenhavebeenstrengthenedbecauseofthisAmendment.DifferentLegislationchangedthepositionofwomenin
society.IthastakenalongtimeforAmendmenttocomeintoforceaslegislation.
TRACINGTHEHISTORY
Anydemocraticgovernanceswearsbycertainvaluesi.e.,individualliberty,humandignity,ruleoflaw,constitutionalismandlimitedgovernment.The
roleofjudiciaryisimportantinprotectingandpreservingthesevaluesifthestatemadeLawsisnotthatmucheffective.Butincaseofpropertyrights
ofwomen,lawswerebiasedtowardsmen.Therewasnoequaltreatmentorequaldistributionofpropertytofemales.Theywerejustmeresurvivors.
Indiahasalwaysbeenamaledominantcountrywhererightsofwomenhavebeenneglected.FromRamayanatoMahabharatha,awomanhasalways
beenasufferer.Ifweseethehistoricalperspectivebefore12thcenturyHinduism,Buddhism,JainismallwereflourishinginharmonyeventheEllora
caveswerebuiltnexttoeachotherbuttheinequityanddegradationofwomenwassanctifiedineveryreligion.SMRITIsays,Neversitalonewitha
womanmother,sisterordaughtershemaytemptyou.
RIGVEDAsays
Womenarepowerlessandhavenorightofinheritance.
MANUSMRITIsays
Womenarenotfitforindependence.Allwomenthinklikewhores.
Itshowshowreligionledtopatriarchalsocietyandplightofwomeninthesocietywhichexisttilltodaybecausepeoplearestilllivinginthebeliefof
followingconservativereligiousprinciplesandthatisthecauseofcontinuanceofilltreatmentofwomentillnow.Butbefore12thcenturyitwas
believedthatthereshouldnotbehonourofonessectandcondemnationofotherwithoutanyreligiousbelief.Thekingswerefocusingonreligion,
ruling,reignbutnobodycaredabouttheplightofwomenandalltheevilpractiseslikeSatiSystem,ChildMarriagesthatwerebeingpractisedinfull
flowandpeopleweresupportingit.In12thcenturyMughalscameinpower.Theirdoctrinesandreligiousviewswereoddwhichwerenotsuitablefor
peopleofotherreligion.Conditionofwomenwasvulnerableintheirreign.TosavethemselvesfromMughalsmanyRajputandotherHinduwomen
committedsuicide.In19thcenturyafterthearrivalofBritishEmpireequalitywasenhancedamongpeople.Theyeliminatedreligiousjuristsbecause
justicewasinconsistentandsuspicious.Evenatthattimeconditionofwomenremainedthesame.AtthattimeIndianChristianswerestrengthened
becauseBritishofficialsappliedtheirownlawsonthem.BythattimeIndiawashavingsomanyevilpracticeslikeChildMarriages,Devdasi,Satisystem
whichwerecurseforwomenonthenameofreligion.SomesocialthinkersworkedfortheireradicationwithBritishers.Legislationsweremadeto
improvetheconditionandstatusofwomeninsociety.AlltheevilpractisescametoanendwiththeabolishmentofSatisystem,ChildMarriages,
Devdasisystem.StrongLegislationsweremadesothatwomenwouldgetequalrightstomen.Butthepropertyrightswerestillinfavourofmen.Some
legislationthatcameintopicturewereHinduWidowsRemarriageAct1856,HinduInheritenceAct,1929,HinduwomansRighttoPropertyAct,1937.
Inspiteofalltheselegislations,womensrightonpropertywasnotabsolute.So,therewasneedforsomeeffectiveandstronglegislationthatcoulddeal
withalltheaspectsofwomenspropertyrightstogetherwithouthavingsomelacuna.
WHOLEPROCESSOFCHANGESINLEGISLATION
AccordingtoUnitedNationsReportinof1980
Halfoftheworldspopulationconsistsofwomen,almost2/3rdoftheworkisdonebythembuttheyholdonly1/10thofworldsincomeand1/100thof
property.

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

1/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

Indiahasbeenamaleorientedcountryandrightsofwomenhavealwaysbeenneglected.Basedonreligiousbeliefsevenin21stcentury,lawsand
rightsgivenunderitareabusiveandareagainstwomen.Thereiscompletemonopolyofpatriarchalsociety.Peoplestillconsiderdaughtersasburden
andsinofpreviouslives.Theyneedsonbecauseoftheirconservativethoughtthathewouldbethesuccessoroffamilyandwouldleadthemtomoksha.
Womenarenotgivenasmuchlibertythattheydeserveeventheyareinnowayinferiortomen.InHinduspeoplestillhavethebeliefthatsonsarethe
successorsoftheirancestralpropertyanddaughtershavenorightinthepropertyofHinduJointFamilyandtheycantbeaKartabecauseitsnottheir
duty.Womenhavesufferedalotofagonybecauseofsuchlawswhichwereneverintheirfavour.Formakingapersonselfsufficientandstrong,
propertyrightsareverymuchimportantbutthoselawswerealsoinfavourofmen.Thebiggeststigmawasthatpeopleresidingatdifferentplaces
weregovernedbydifferentlawslikepeoplelivinginnorthernpartofthecountryweregovernedunderMitaksharaSchool,peoplelivinginBengal
weregovernedunderDayabhagaSchool,peoplelivinginGujaratweregovernedunderKonkanschoolandpeoplelivinginKeralaweregovernedunder
MarumkkatyamandNambudrischools.Differentlawsgoverningdifferentpeoplebydifferentwaysmadethepropertylawsmorecomplicating.Earlier,
womeninaHinduJointFamilyhadmerelyarightofsurvival.ShehadnorightinProperty.UndermostoftheschoolsincludingMitaksharaSchool
daughterswerenottreatedequallytosonsandhadnorightofinheritanceorsuccessionintheproperty.Eventhelegislationthattalkedabout
womenspropertyrightswasnottotallyfavouringthem.Theconservativephilosophyofpeopleevensupersededthelegislationandwomenwerenot
givenabsoluterightovertheproperty.Therightsgiventothemwerewithsuchconditionswhichwereunfavourableforthem.Marriedwomenhadno
rightinJointFamilyProperty.Widowsrightonherdeceasedhusbandspropertywasforfeitedincaseofremarriage.Herintrestinthepropertywas
notabsolute.Shehadnorighttoalienatetheproperty.Thepositionthatwasgiventoherbythelawswasjustofamereuser.
TheConstitutionofIndiaprohibitsdiscriminationonthegroundofsexandguaranteesequalityforall.Yetwomenareroutinelydiscriminatedinalmost
everylegislation.Womenhavealwaysbeentreatedasadisadvantageoussectionofthesociety.Theyhavelackedpowersocially,economicallyand
politically.Shehasalwaysbeendominatedbythemalemembersofthefamily.Thepositionofwomenincaseofpropertyrightshasbeenvulnerable.
So,therewasneedtostrengthenandamelioratethepositionofwomenandtotreatherwithdignity.ConstitutionofIndiahasguaranteedcertainrights
whicharefundamentalinfavourofwomen.Thestateisentitledtomakespeciallawsfortheprotectionandbenefitofwomen.Asthematernal
functionsplacesherinthestruggleofsubsistenceandherphysicalwellbeingbecomesanobjectofpublicinterest.So,speciallegislationsare
inevitable.Themostimportantsteptostrengthenthewomenpowerofthecountryistogivethemequalpropertyrightswithmen.Evenafterthe
enactmentofHinduSuccessionActin1956bywhichwomenweregivenequalinheritancerightswiththemalemembersofthefamily,thedefectin
MitaksharacoparcenerysystemwasstillpersistingbecausethestructureofJointFamilywasstillthereandaccordingtotheirlawsdaughtersusedto
getsmallportionofshareincomparisontotheson.Butincaseofdivisionoffathersproperty,propertywasequallydividedbetweenbrother,sister
andmother.
Itwasnotuntil2005,58yearsafterindependenceIndiabeganrecognisingPropertyrightsasaseriousandsystematicissueaffectingwomen.The
HinduSuccession(Amendment)Act2005,hasbeenaremarkablestepandhasactedasaboonforwomenwhosufferedbecauseofloopholesin
Propertylawsforsuchalongperiod.[1]
ChangesinlawsrelatedtoAgriculturalLandSection4(2)ofHinduSuccessionAct,1956talkedaboutinterestinagriculturallandsbutthestates
havingtheirowntenuricallawshadgotexemptionfromthissection.Theinheritanceruleswerecompletelybasedupondevolutionanddifferentstates
haddifferenttenuriallaws.Therewasnolawofinheritanceinmanystatesassuch.So,inthosestates,HinduSuccessionActwasapplicable.Butthere
weresomestateslikeJammuandKashmir,HimachalPradesh,Punjab,UttarPradesh,HaryanaandDelhiandthelawsrelatedtoinheritanceinthese
stateswerecompletelymalebiased.Preferredheirsweremalesandwomenwereplacedinveryloworder.Anotherdrawbackoftheselawswas
womensinterestinthepropertywasnotabsolute.Itusedtocometoanendincaseofremarriage.[2]Theargumentthatwasadvancedinsupportof
thesestatelawswasdivisionoflandbetweendaughterswouldleadtomoreandmoredivisionoflandanditwoulddecreasetheprofitabilityofland.
The2005AmendmentofHinduSuccessionAct1956abolishedallthesestatelawsandthesaidsectionofHinduSuccessionAct,1956wasmade
applicableinallthestates.Ithasstrengthenedthewomenwhoaredependentonagriculturallandbecausenowtheycanactasanownerandtheyare
nolongerjustameresurvivoranddependentonsomebodytofulfiltheirneedsandbeartheirexpenses.
ChangesbroughtinMitaksharaCoParceneryProperty
MainpurposeoftheHinduSuccessionAct,1956wastodealwithintestatesuccessionamongHindus.ThepropertiesofaHindumaledyingintestateis
dividedinthefollowingmanner.Itgoestothesonanddaughterofthedeceasedthentothewidowormotherandthentotheheirsofpredeceasedson
ordaughterofthedeceased.BeforetheAmendmentpeopleweregovernedbytheprovisionsofsection6oftheAct.Accordingtowhichdevolutionof
thepropertyusedtotakeplacebysurvivorship.TheprovisionwasIntestateshalldevolveonotherscoparcenersbyruleofsurvivorship.Accordingto
thissectionfemalehadnorightofinheritanceofancestralproperty.Thedaughtershadnorightofcontrolandmanagementovertheproperty.They
werejustdependentonthemalemembersandwerelivingparasiticallives.
The2005Amendmenthasbroughttremendouschangeinthepositionofwomenbyincludingtheminthepurviewofcoparcenerandbringingthemto
suchapositionthattheyshareequalrightswithmalemembers.NowthefemalemembercanalsobecomeaKartaandcancarryallthedutiesand
responsibilitiesinsamemannerlikemen.ClassIheirshavebeenbroadenedandnowtheheirsofpredeceaseddaughtersalsogotrighttoinheritthe
ancestralproperty.
ChangesinrightsregardingtodwellinghouseSection23ofHinduSuccessionAct,1956wasrepealedbythe2005Amendment.Priortothe
AmendmentFemalemembershadnorighttoaskforpartitionofdwellinghouseexceptinthecasewheremalemembersaredoingso.Thequestion
thatcamebeforethecourtmanytimeswaswhetherafemalememberhasrighttoaskforpartitionofdwellinghouseifthereisonlyonemale?The
SupremeCourtinNarashimahaMurthyv.Susheelabai[3]heldthatUnderthepurviewofsection23ofHinduSuccessionAct1956,thedaughterhasno
righttoaskforpartitionofherpredeceasedfatherspropertyevenifthereisonlyonesonbecausetheultimateobjectiveistopreservethedwelling
house.So,numberofmalemembersdoesnotmatter.Itwasfurtherheldthatonlydeserted,unmarried,separateorwidowdaughterhadtherightto
liveinthedwellinghouseoftheintestate.
Bytheamendmentintheyear2005,thedaughter,doesnotmatterwhethermarriedornothavearightequaltothatofamalememberofthefamily
andtheycanaskforpartitionofdwellinghouse.Ithasstrengthenedthewomenespeciallythosehousewiveswhoaredependentonothersfortheir
andsurvivaloftheirchildrenandsuffersalotofpainandagonybecauseofdomesticviolencebecausetheyhadnootherplacetogoandhadnoother
option.ButtheAmendmenthaschangedthescenarioandpositionofwomencompletelyandafterhavingthisrightwomenarenolongerdependenton
theirmalecounterparts.

AMENDMENTSBYSTATES
TheprovisionsofHinduSuccessionActwerelackingbehindinalmosteveryotherstateandwerenotinfavourofwomen.Butthereweresomestates
wherewomenweretreatedequallysociallyandeconomically.ThesestateswereMaharashtra,Kerala,TamilNadu,KarnatakaandAndhraPradesh.In
allthesestatesdaughtersweretreatedasacoparcenerandhadthesamerightintheancestralpropertyasthatofason.KeralaabolishedtheJoint
FamilySystemandthecoparcenershadnorighttoclaimforancestralpropertyinthelifetimeoftheintestate.
CHANGESTHATCAMEAFTER2005AMENDMENTINTHEACT
1.CoparcenaryrighthasbeengiventodaughtersunderMitaksharaschoolinthesamemannerasgiventothesoninaHinduJointFamily.
2.Rightsgiventothedaughtersinthepropertyisinnowaydifferenttothatgiventoason.
3.ShecanbecomeKartaofthefamilyandshecancarrytheliabilitiesandresponsibilities.
4.HinduMitaksharaCoparceneralsoincludesdaughterasacoparcener.TheActdoesnothaveretrospectiveeffect.So,suchpartitionsoralienations
thathavetakenplacebefore20thDecember2004willnotbeaffectedbytheAmendment.

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

2/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

thathavetakenplacebefore20thDecember2004willnotbeaffectedbytheAmendment.
5.PropertythataHindufemalewouldholdunderthissection,shewouldbeentitledtodisposeitoralienateitaccordingtoherwill.
6.InterestofpropertyofadeceasedHindushalldevolvebyintestatesuccessionnotbysurvivorship.
7.Daughterswouldbeallottedshamesharestothatofason.HeirsofpredeceaseddaughterhavebeenincludedinclassIheir.
8.Piousobligationregardingancestorsdebtwasabolishedcompletely.
9.InterestofMitaksharacoparcenaryistobetreatedaspartitionwouldhavebeentakenplacejustbeforehisdeaththatisnotionalpartition.
THEWHOLEPROCESSINPARLIAMENT
OurthenPrimeMinisterPanditJawaharlalNehruwasdisheartenedbythestatusofwomeninIndiaevenaftertheprovisionsfortheminconstitution
thatprohibitsdiscriminationongroundofsexandguaranteesequalityforall.Yetwomenwerebeingdiscriminatedbythelegislationitself.Evenafter
somuchpressurefromorthodoxclassofthesociety,toremovethediscriminationanddisparity,theHinduSuccessionAct,1956cameintoforceon
17thJune,1956thatlaiddownuniformsystemoflawsforHindusforsuccessionandinheritance.So,manychangeswereintroducedtostrengthen
womenandmakethemselfsufficientyetanomaliesremainedinsection6oftheAct.IntheverybeginningneedforAmendmentinHinduLawwasfelt
toabolishsurvivorshipruleofMitaksharalawandalltherightsonpropertygiventosonwhichwerediscriminatorytodaughtersandsome
amendmentsinthelawofsuccession.TheBillwasdraftedbyB.N.RaucommitteeundertheguidanceofDoctorB.R.Ambedkar.Butbecauseofthe
conservativephilosophyofthepeopleitwasopposedbymassscale.ThenLawMinisterMr.BiswasrejectedtheBill.Finallyintheyear2004theBill
relatedtoalltheseAmendmentswaspresentedinRajyaSabhaafterLawCommissions174thReportonWomensRightonPropertythatcameinthe
year2000.ThejourneyoftheAmendmenthasnotbeenthateasyasitseems.Thereweresomanyoppositions,theBillwasfullofshortcomings.
EverythinghastobecoveredRightsofWomen,HumanRights,andLandRights.Finallyafterthecontributionofindividuals,NGOs,Lawyers,MPs,the
BillturnedintoawiderangingAct.[4]
SCENARIOBEFORETHEAMENDMENTOFHINDUSUCCESSIONACT1956
HinduWomensRighttoPropertyAct,1937
ThisActcameintoforcebecausetheBritishersfeltthattheonlywaytoworkfortheupliftmentofIndianwomenistogivethemrightinintestates
property.BythisAct,withsonandgrandson,widowofthedeceasedandtherespectivewidowsofhissonandgrandsonwerealsogivenrightinhis
property.Accordingtosection3(2)ofthisAct,itwasdeclaredthatwidowhassameinterestinthepropertythatherhusbandhad.[5]Butthisrightwas
notabsolute.Itwasrestrictedongroundsofchastityandremarriageundersection3(3)ofthisAct.ItwasheldinthecaseofRamaiyaKonarvs.
MottaiahMudaliar[6]thatunchastityofaHindumarriedwomanatthetimeofherhusbandsdeathleadstodisqualificationfrominheritingthe
propertyofdeceased.
FurtherincaseofDagduvs.Namdeo[7]BombayHCheldthattheinheritancerightsprovidedtofemalesundertheprovisionsofthisActisnotabsolute
andisnotequaltothatofmalesanditdoesnotincludeagriculturallandanddaughtersinitspurview.
Theinheritancerights,however,werenotatparwiththatofmensasithasexcludedagriculturallandanddaughtersfromtheambitoftheAct.
UnderMitaksharaschoolcoparcenersincludedonlythemaledescendantsthatisson,grandsonandgreatgrandsonthatwasabirthright.Daughters
werenotpartofit.Propertywasdevolvedbysurvivorshipandnotbyintestatesuccession.So,thefluctuationintheshareofmembersusedtotake
placebythebirthordeathofanymalememberintheJointFamily.Inheritancebysuccessionwasallowedonlyinthecaseofselfacquiredproperty
andfemaleswerealsoentitledtogetshareinthatproperty.PriortoamendmentHinduInheritanceAct,1929,underBengal,BenaresandMithilasub
schoolsonlyfivefemalerelationswereentitledforinheritance.Theyweredaughter,mother,widow,paternalgrandmotherandpaternalgreatgrand
mother.UnderMadrassubschoolotherfemaleswerealsoentitledtoinherit.Thoseweresister,daughtersdaughterandsonsdaughter.Daughters
daughterandsonsdaughtersweretermedasBandhusoftheintestate.So,theywereentitledtoinherittheproperty.UnderBombayschooloflawa
largenumberoffemalerelativeswereentitledforinheritence.Thosewerestepmother,sonsorbrotherswidow,halfsister,fatherssisteretc.
DayabhagaSchoolwascompletelydifferentfromMitakshara.Itdidntgiverighttomembersbybirthorsurvivorship.EventhoughJointFamilySystem
wasinexistence.Therewasonesamekindofruleforsuccessionforeveryone.Itdidntmatteriffamilyisjointordividedorpropertyisinheritedor
selfacquired.Thelawwasiffatherisalivethesonsordaughterscantbecomecoparceners.Daughtershadalsoshareinthepropertylikethatofason.
FemalesalsohadtherighttobeaKartaandcarrytheresponsibilitiesandliabilitiesinthesamemannerasamalememberdoes.[8]
UnderMarumkattayamlawinKerala,motherandchildrensharedjointrightsinthepropertyaslineagewasdecidedthroughfemalesnotbymales.So,
daughterhadsamerightsoverthepropertylikethatofasonandtheywereselfsufficientandfamilysystemtherewasmatrilineal.so,therewasno
questionofexploitationofrightsoffemales.
Section2ofHinduWidowsRemarriageActprovidedthattherightsandinterestsofcertainpropertieswhichawidowgetsfromherhusbandaslimited
estateshallceaseuponherremarriageandshalldevolveasifshehasdied.Propertyofwomanwasdividedundertwoheads:(a)stridhanand(b)
womensestate.
Stridhanconstitutedthosepropertieswhichshereceivedbywayofgiftfromrelationsthatincludedmostofthemovableproperty(thoughsometimesa
houseorpieceofland)givenbythestrangersatthetimeofmarriage.Propertiesincludedinstridhanwere
Giftsandbequestsfromrelations.
Giftsandbequestsfromstrangers.
Propertyacquiredbyselfexertionandmechanicalarts.
Propertypurchasedwithstridhan.
Propertyacquiredbycompromise.
Propertyobtainedbyadversepossession.
Propertyobtainedinlieuofmaintenance.
Propertyconsideredinwomensestate
Propertyobtainedbyinheritence.
Sharesobtainedonpartition.
Thecharacteristicfeatureofwomensestatewasthatthefemalecouldtakeitasalimitedowner.Shehadtherighttobetheownerofthepropertyin
thesamewayasanyotherindividualofhis/herpropertysubjecttotwolimitations
Shecouldnotordinarilyalienatetheproperty.
Onherdeathitwoulddevolveuponnextheiroflastfullowner.
IncaseofJankivs.Narayanswami,itwasobservedbythePrivyCouncilthateventhoughpositionofwomaninthepropertyislikethatofanownerbut

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

3/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

IncaseofJankivs.Narayanswami,itwasobservedbythePrivyCouncilthateventhoughpositionofwomaninthepropertyislikethatofanownerbut
herpowersarelimited.[9]
WhenBritisherscameinIndiathecountryexperiencedadrasticchangesocially,economicallyandpolitically.ButtheBritishersdidntwanttointerfere
withthePersonallawsofcommunitiesbecauseitcouldhavehurtthesentimentsofpeopleandthatwouldhaveledtoarevolt.Reformsweregoingon
andsocialmovementswerethere.NewLegislationswerecomingwithsmallsmallchangestoraisethepositionofwomeninthesociety.The
legislationsthatwereprevalentthattimewerefullofdefectsandloopholes.Theywerecompletelydiscriminatoryforwomen.Womensrighton
propertywasnotabsolute.Theyweresubjecttosomanyrestrictions.Shehadnorighttodisposeoralienatetheproperty.Finallyafteraroundnine
yearsofIndependenceastronglegislationcametogoverntheHindusthroughoutthecountryatpar.
SomelawsthatcameunderHinduSuccessionact1956
OnlymalesweregiventherighttobeacoparcenerunderMitaksharaSchooloflaw.
Coparcenerwasgivenarighttogivehispropertybywill.
ExemptiongiventoMarumkkattayamandAliyansatanacommunitieswereabolished.
Provisionofdaughterandsongettingequalsharesinfathersselfacquiredpropertywaschanged.
Marrieddaughterhadnorighttoresidenceinhomeofparentsifsheisnotdesertedorwidow.
Section14oftheActmadefemalefullownerofthepropertypossessedbyher.Abolitionoftheheadwomansestatecompletely.
SupremeCourtincaseofRangubaivs.Laxman[10]heldthattodetermineinterestofadeceasedcoparcenerfirstlyhispropertyshouldbedetermined
andthenwidowsshareshouldbeawardedfromthecoparceneryproperty.
IncaseofGurupadvs.Hirabai[11]SCheldthatsection6ofHinduSuccessionActisnothingbuttheculminationofaprocessofsociallegislationthat
beganwiththeHinduLawofInheritence(Amendment)Act,1929withaviewtoamelioratethestatusofwomen.So,thenotionalpartitionbecomes
actualpartitionafterthedeathofdeceasedanditsvalid.
IncaseofSavitaSamvedivs.UnionofIndia[12]SupremeCourtheldthatitmaybediscriminatorytodistinguishbetweenmarriedandunmarried
women.Butmarriedandunmarriedwomenhavetobeplaceddifferentlyfordeterminingtheirrightsonproperty.
IncaseofNarsimahaMurthyvs.Shushilabai[13]SCheldthatundersection23ofHinduSuccessionAct,adaughtercantaskforpartitionofdwelling
housebecausethatwouldmakethemalememberhomelessanditwouldleadtofragmentation.
TheaimofAmendmentintheActwastohaveequaltreatmentforallandtoremovetheloopholesinthelegislationandtogivedaughtersandfemales
equalrightstothatofmen.Butthereisneedofawarenessamongstwomenandtheyshouldclaimtheirrightsinspiteofwaivingitjustlikethat.
Becauseinthatcasetheywillnotbebenefitedwiththeamendmentthatisforthemonlyandjudiciaryshouldgiveallpossibleguidelinestothestatefor
implementationoflaws.
LawsunderHinduSuccessionActwhicharestilldiscriminatoryforwomen
Accordingtotheprovisionundersection15(1)ifchildrenandhusbandofthedeceaseddaughterarethere,motherisexcludedfrominheritingher
daughtersproperty.
Accordingtosection15(2)womenaretreatedaslimitedownersforthepropertytheyholdincaseofinheritencebyacquisition.
Section15(1)(b)keepsheirsoffatheraboveheirsofmotherforclaimingpropertyforinheritence.
IncaseofOmPrakashvs.RadhaCharanthe[14]SCheldthatincasewhereintestatewomandiedwithoutmakingawillevenifpropertyoffemaleis
selfacquiredtheheirsofhusbandwouldbegivenpreferenceoverherparents.
Conclusion
Toachieveequalityinrealtermsfirstlyweneedtoremovediscrepanciesinlawswhicharebiasedtowardsmales.Weshouldstopthelegislatorsfrom
makingsuchlawswhicharediscriminatory.Evenaftertheamendmentstillthedefectsexists.ThesoleobjectiveofthisActtostrengthenwomenby
givingthemrightsinpropertyandtomakethemselfsufficient.
JustmakingthelawsorAmendmentsinlawsisnotenough,ifthereisnotproperexecutionofthoselaws.Inonesidewearetalkingaboutupliftmentof
womeninthesocietyandmakingthemselfsufficientandatthenextstepwearestrugglingwithrisingnumberofdowrydeathcases.Thatisacursefor
ournation.Thereisnodoubtthattheamendmenthasawidescopeanditiskindofboonforwomenbecausebyprovidingthemrightsinpropertyand
claimforpartitionindwellinghomehasmadethemeconomicallyandsociallystrong.Butamendmentjustcantbebeneficialbyitself,ifwomenwillnot
useit.Forthatwomenneedtobemadeawarefortheirrights.So,theycanutilisetheserightstothemaximumextent.Theyouthshouldcomeforward
foritandtakealeadinthemovementtomakewomenawareoftheirrights.Themediashouldhelpinit.Objectivebehindtheamendmentshouldnot
bewastedandtheconservativepeopleshouldcomeoutoftheirshellsandwomenshouldbegiventheirrightsasspecifiedinlawandtheremaining
discrepanciesinthelawshouldbecompletelyabolished.so,thatequalitycouldbeachievedinrealterms.
[1]TheHinduPublishedonSeptember25,2005.
[2]KasturiDevivsDeputyDirectorofConsolidationAIR1976SC2515
[3]AIR1996SCC(3)644
[4]Lawcommissions174thReportof5thMay,2000
[5]BhonduGanpatKiradandors.Vs.RamdayalGovindramKirad&anr.AIR1960MP51
[6]AIR1951,Madras954,
[7]AIR1955,Bombay152
[8]FamilyLawParasDiwan,2009Edition
[9](1916)43I.A.207
[10]AIR1966,Bombay1969
[11]AIR1978,SC1239
[12]1996SCC(2)380

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

4/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

[12]1996SCC(2)380
[13]1996SCC(3)644
[14]AIR2009,SC3241

Sharethis:

14

Related

Women'spropertyrightsunderHindu
Succession(Amendment)Act,2005
December8,2015
In"Miscellaneous"

SC:RestrictsWomens'RighttoAncestral
Property
November2,2015
In"LegalNews"

LegalBlocJournal:Vol.1Issue1
March6,2015
In"Miscellaneous"

PreviousArticle

NextArticle

CallforPapers:'InternationalJournalof
LawandPolicyReview'NUJSSubmitby
April30,2015

DVSubbaRaoMemorialMootcourt
competition:DSNLU,Visakhapatnam
RegisterbyMarch30,2015

ABOUTAUTHOR
SureshKhadav

5COMMENTS

siddeswara.M.V.
October15,2015at2:22pm

Reply

DearSir,
kindlycreateonemoreHindusucessionAmendmentlawforpoorpersons.
becausethislawwillsupportonlyforrichpeoplesandgovernmentwillworkonlyforrichpeoplest
hatallpeoplesknowverywell.
ihave3sistersihaveonly1acreeagricultureland,sothatnoonewascomingtomarrymysisters,
becauseiamnotrichandnothavetoomuchofland,stillmysistersnotmarriedonlybecauseofyo
urhindusucessionamendmentact2005.
sopleasesuggestgovernmenttogivesomelandsformysisterssothatshewillbecomeaownerans
somanypeopleswillstandinaquetomarryher.
becauseof2005fruitfulllifeandreleationshipswasbreakeddowninvillages.noweverywhereth
epropertycaseswasincreasedandlawyerswillhavegoodprofit.
youhavetofeelshametopublishsuchessay.youarethinkingthatyouarebrilliantandremaininga
llarefools.

siddeswara
October29,2015at12:01pm

Reply

iamnotagainstthedaughtersoftheirshare,1956actandstatesactwasacceptedbypeoples,but20
05actwasopposeditwasnotclearinmanywaysitwasdesignedwithoutanyknowledge.canany
oneanswerthequestionsiraisedfrom2005act.dueto2005law70%ofpeopleslosttheirreleatio
nandgoodwillinfamilyallarearoundcourts.
IunderstandfromHindusucessionAmendmentact2005,equalpropertyshare
wasgivenfordaughterswithirrespectiveoftheirdateofbirth,Marriage,deathoffather.etc.thisla
wsays
bybirthdaughterwillbecomecopercener.
ifthedaughterbybirthbecomesaCopercener,thenwhypointisaddedno
propertysharefordaughtersifthepropertyisdividedbefore20thDec2004.,bybirthifshebecome
copercenerthentherightswillbethereeventhedevaluationtakesplacebefore20thdec2005,isit

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

5/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty
copercenerthentherightswillbethereeventhedevaluationtakesplacebefore20thdec2005,isit
notamistakedonebylawofcommission.
oralpartationandfamilysettlementwasnotincludedinpartation,onlyregisteredpartitionisinclu
ded,itsnotamistakeinvillagesnoonewillgoforregisteredpartationdeed,everyonewillmakeora
lpartationandtheymutuatetheirnamesinrevenuerecords.
asper2005lawrevenuerecordswasalsonotvalidforpartation.
whenyousayequalrightsitshouldbeequalineverythingmaybeinsharingthepropertyandshari
ngtheresponsibilities,itsjusteasytocomeandaskforashareinthepropertyforamarriedwomen
s.whyjointfamilydebitisremovedin2005law.cananyonesayitscorrectiftheyhaveequalshare
thenwhytheynotequaldebtdonebytheirfathers.
nowjustshowmeonegirlwhogotmarriedandnowafter20whowillcomeforwardtotaketheres
ponsibilityofthejointfamilydebts,willanywomencometotaketheresponsibilityofdebtsinjoint
family.pleaseclarifyhowitwasright,madebylaw.
itsnotjustmodernthoughtyouhavetolookretrospectivelyonhowthesocietysurvivedthanand
watfacilitieswomenhadthanandwatresponsibilitiesmenhad
thereshouldbeacutoffpointafterwhichonlydaughtersshouldhaveright,notlike60yearsoldwo
mencomingforthepropertysharewhogranddaughtershavechildrenthatisbull****
everyonesayswomenswheresufferedfromyears,butinrealitymenwassufferedalotcomparedt
owomens.
pleasesuggestsifiamwronginanypoints.

M.S.Ramachandra
November24,2015at11:26am

Reply

Youareabsolutelyright,Ialsoagreewithyou.Youare100%correct,nowomenwillcometotaket
heresponsiblityofdebtexceptaskingforshare.Iamalsooneofthecountrymenwhosuffereddue
tothislaw.

sanjoo
December11,2015at5:58pm

Reply

Akdamsahikahaapneesmekoidoraynahiesahihotahai

sangitabari
January14,2016at11:02am

Reply

Iamnotaggreewithyou,sonnottakeresposbilityfather&motherafterhismarriageheonlydema
ndfatherspropertyandhenegelectfather&motheriamthedaughterofthatfatheriamsufferingi
nthis,iamalsomarried,mybrotheronlydemandmoneytofather&fathergivesmoneytohimbut
henotcarefather&mothersowhyyoupeoplesaysthatdughternotrightsisee95%casessuchin
mysourindingsame,girlswerecareherfather&mothersononlydemandedmoney&leavethelon
ley

LEAVEAREPLY
Enteryourcommenthere...

FOLLOWUS!

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

6/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

SUBSCRIBEUS.FREE!!!

Enteryouremailaddress:

Subscribe

DeliveredbyFeedBurner

FACEBOOK

ADVERTISEMENT

MEDIAPARTNER

CALLFORPAPERS

OPPORTUNITIES

CASEBRIEFS

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

INTERNSHIPS/JOBS

ARTICLES,CASECOMMENTS

7/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

ATalkonStrategiesofNuclear
Proliferation:HowStatesLearned
toLoveGettingtheBomb@CPR
NationalConferenceOnEvidence
Law:Contemporary
Development@Galgotias
University
NationalSeminaronCurrent
issuesinIntellectualProperty
LawsinIndia@ILSPune[Feb5
6,2016]
AdaysNationalConferenceon
EnvironmentalSustainability&
SocialDynamicsinRGNULon5th
Mar2016
READMORE

CaseBrief:UnionofIndiav.M/S
BrightPowerProjects(I)P.Ltd.
VishwaLochanMadanvs.Union
ofIndia
DuluDevivStateofAssamand
Others
Vinay&Ors.Vs.Stateof
Karnataka&ANR.[Criminal
AppealNo.644/2015arisingout
ofS.L.P.(CRL.)No.1550/2012]
NawalKishoreMishravHigh
CourtofJudicatureatAllahabad
thoughitsRegistrarGeneral
READMORE

VacancyforAsst.ProfinHistory@
RGNUL,Punjab[Walkinon8th
Feb2016]
InternshipOpportunity:Research
AssociateatLexQuest

CaseBrief:B.Radhakrishnan,K.
Padmarajv.StateofTamilNadu
VennangotAnuradhaSamirv
VennangotMohandasSamir
DevelopmentofLawofTortsin
India:ShortNotes

ContentDeveloperposts
(Stipend):LegalBloc;Applyby
Feb.7,2016

TheCollegiumSystem
JobOpportunity@iPleaders:
Accounts&FinanceExecutive

TheIslamicRepublicofPakistan
v.TheRepublicofIndia
READMORE

VacanciesatNLIUBhopal;Apply
by05.02.2016
LEGALBLOCTEAM
LegalBlocTeam

Mr.ShailendraKumarEditor,LegalBloc
Journal
LEGALBLOCJOURNAL
Vol.2Issue1
Vol.1Issue5
Vol.1Issue4
Vol.1Issue3
Vol.1Issue2
Vol.1Issue1
ALLPOSTS
SelectMonth

#ASK_LB
ItisaclichdquotethatLawisaninstrumentofsocialchange.Itistruethatlawhasthepowertorevolutionizethesocietyinwhichwelive.Lawcanmakeapersonslifeworthwhile.However,law
cannotbeusedasaweapontorevampthesocialorderuntilitisknownandeasilyaccessibletoall.Manypeople,eventhemosteducatedones,areunawareoftheirrights.Thislackofawarenessand
understandingpaveswayforthosewhounjustlyexploitthepeople.
#Ask_LBisaninitiativebyLegalBloctogeneratelegalawarenessamongpeople.Itseekstoansweranyqueriesandproblemsrelatedtolawviatelephonicconversationsandemails.Ourteamofaide
aimstoworktirelesslytoreplycomprehensivelytoanydoubtsandqueriesrelatedtolawandlegalmanagementwiththesupportsofseverallegalexpertsandprofessionals.Wealsorequestthereaders
toprovidehelpandseekassistanceforthosepeoplewhodonothaveaccesstothemodernmeansofcommunicationbybringingtheirproblemsandissuestoournoticesothataidcanbeprovided.

HOME

ABOUTUS

ADVISOR

OURTEAM

WORKWITHUS

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

LEGALBLOCJOURNAL(ISSN:23950277)

PRIVACYPOLICY

TERMSOFUSE

ADVERTISE

CONTACTUS

8/9

2/10/2016

WomensRightonproperty

Copyright2016.AllRightsReserved.

https://legalbloc.com/womensrightonproperty/

9/9