DISQUALIFICATION AS TO SUCCESSION UNDER

HINDU SUCCESSION ACT

PROJECT SUBMITTED BY- NIHARIKA BHATI

B.B.A L.L.B (Hons.)

ROLL NO. – 1839

SUBMITTED TO – MS. POOJA SRIVASTAVA

(FACULTY OF FAMILY LAW II)

PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE COURSE FAMILY LAW II FOR OBTAINING DEGREE B.B.A
L.L.B (Hons.)

FEBRUARY 2019

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYANAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA
800001.

1|Page
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.A. LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled
“DISQUALIFICATION AS TO SUCCESSION UNDER HINDU SUCCESSION ACT”
submitted at Chanakya National Law University, Patna is an authentic record of my work carried
out under the supervision of MRS. POOJA SRIVASTAVA. I have not submitted this work
elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the contents of my Project
Report.

(Signature of the Candidate)

Niharika Bhati

Chanakya National Law University, Patna

February 2019

2|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide Mrs.
Pooja Srivastava for her exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement
throughout the course of this thesis. The blessing, help and guidance given by her time to time
shall carry me a long way in the journey of life on which I am about to embark.

I am obliged to staff members of Chanakya National Law University, for the valuable
information provided by them in their respective fields. I am grateful for their cooperation
during the period of my assignment.

Lastly, I thank almighty, my parents, brother, sisters and friends for their constant
encouragement without which this assignment would not be possible.

Thank you!

3|Page
 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The research will facilitate better understanding of the following:-

 The provisions related to disqualification as to succession.

 Exceptions under which disqualification as to succession can’t take place.

HYPOTHESIS

 Disease, deformity, defect and remarriage etc., cannot be the grounds for exclusion from
inheritance.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The researcher has adopted doctrinal method of research. The researcher has made extensive use
of the library and the internet sources.
The method of writing followed in the course of the research project is primarily analytical.
The researcher has followed a uniform mode of citation.

SOURCES OF DATA

PRIMARY- Hindu Succession Act, 1956

SECONDARY- Books, journals and internet.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

A comprehensive review of literature is an essential part of any scientific investigation. It is

necessary for the researcher to acquaint herself with the work done in the past which induces
insight into the problem for further work.

4|Page
 STYLE OF WRITING

The researcher will be using both descriptive and analytical styles of writing.

MODE OF CITATION

The researcher will be using a uniform mode of citation throughout this paper.

SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Though the researcher will try her level best not to leave any stone unturned in doing this project
work to highlight various aspects relating to the topic, but the topic is so dynamic field of law,
the researcher will sight with some of unavoidable limitations. The limitations encountered by
the researcher were the paucity of time.

5|Page
 CHAPTERIZATION

CHAPTER 1. Disqualification as to Succession.

CHAPTER 2. Grounds for Disqualification.

CHAPTER 3. Exception to Disqualification.

CHAPTER 4. Related Case Laws

CHAPTER 5. Conclusion

Bibliography

6|Page
 INTRODUCTION

Family law is an area of the law that deals with family related issues and domestic relations
including, but not limited to: the nature of marriage, civil unions and domestic partnership issues
arising during marriage, (including spouse abuse, legitimacy, adoption, surrogacy, child abuse,
and child abduction), the termination of the relationship, and ancillary matters (including
divorce, annulment, property settlements, alimony, and parental responsibility orders). Family
law is the broad term. The scope of family law is subjective in nature. There are different
branches of family law. The most important part under family law is the Hindu Succession Act
1956. This project is mainly focused on laws related to disqualification under the Hindu
Succession Act 1956, and what old Hindu law and Modern Hindu laws say about disqualification
this. There are certain laws related to disqualification law, like certain widows remarrying may
not inherit as widows, murderer disqualified, converts decedents disqualified, succession when
heir disqualified. There is one exception to disqualification in which person shall not be
disqualified - disease, defect, etc. - not to disqualify1.

Inheritance of property has always been a contentious issue. In India, the Hindu Succession Act
1956 contains provisions regarding inheritance of property. The succession to the estate of a
deceased Hindu is not automatic and has to be as per the provisions of the law.

At the same time, the Hindu Succession Act also contains various provisions which disqualify
the legal heir to succeed to the estate. A person may be a legal heir of the deceased person. Still,
he may be disqualified to inherit the property.
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 does not follow the old text of disqualifications of heirs and
mentions some new disqualifications which debar the heirs to succeed the property of the
intestate. These disqualifications are—

(1) Disqualification arising from remarriage. (Section 24)

(2) Disqualification arising on account of commission of murder. (Section 25)
(3) Disqualification arising from conversion. (Section 26)

The old division of disqualifications of heirs into physical, mental, moral, religious and equitable
has been dispensed with under the present Act. In Khagendra Nath Ghosh v. Karunadhar, the
Calcutta High Court lays down that excepting sections 24, 25 and 26 there is no other provision
under the Act which provides for disqualifications of heirs to succeed.2

These sections do not disqualify any female heir on the ground of her unchastity or leading an
immoral life. Thus the unchastity of wife does not exclude her from claiming inheritance in the

1
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/disqualifications-for-inheritance/articleshow/1391104.cms
2
https://www.kaanoon.com/44367/valid-grounds-for-disqualification-of-heir-under-hindu-succession-act

7|Page
property of her husband, nor could she be divested of the property which she has once inherited
on the ground that she has become unchaste. Under the old Hindu law physical disability or want
of organ viz, deafness, dumbness, congenital and incurable blindness, leprosy etc, mental
disability like lunacy, idiocy etc. were the grounds of exclusion from inheritance3. The Hindu
Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928 removed all the disqualifications except lunacy
or idiocy. Section 28 of the Act has declared that defect, disease, deformity etc. shall not be the
grounds of exclusion from inheritance.

3
https://www.nrilegalservices.com/inheritance-under-hindu-succession-act-who-can-who-cannot/

8|Page
 1. DISQUALIFICATION AS TO SUCCESSION

In the matter of law relating to intestate1succession, the traditional law of inheritance for Hindus
gave room in a large measure to the Hindu Succession Act 1956. Prior to 1956, the Mitakshara
and the Dayabhaga4 were the two predominant schools of Hindu law governing the law of
succession. The minor sub- divisions of the Mitakshara were the Benares school, the Mithila
school, the Bombay school and the Madras school. The Kara and most of the tribal communities
of the north-eastern states of India followed matriarchal system of inheritance. Therefore, owing
to these diverse practices, the Hindu Succession Act 1956 was enacted. The object of the Hindu
Succession Act 1956 was to amend and codify the law of intestate succession among the Hindus.
It came into force on 17 June 1956. As a codifying enactment, the Hindu Succession Act 1956
has made far-reaching changes in the structure of the Hindu law of inheritance and succession5.
This project report is mainly focused on laws related to disqualification under the Hindu
Succession Act 1956, and what old Hindu law and Modern Hindu laws say about disqualification
this. There are certain laws related to disqualification law, like certain widows remarrying may
not inherit as widows, murderer disqualified, converts decedents disqualified, succession when
heir disqualified. There is one exception to disqualification in which person shall not be
disqualified - disease, defect, etc. - not to disqualify.6

Inheritance of property has always been a contentious issue. In India, the Hindu Succession Act
1956 contains provisions regarding inheritance of property. The succession to the estate of a
deceased Hindu is not automatic and has to be as per the provisions of the law.
At the same time, the Hindu Succession Act also contains various provisions which disqualify
the legal heir to succeed to the estate. A person may be a legal heir of the deceased person. Still,
he may be disqualified to inherit the property.7
The grounds on which such an act may happen are:

(1) Disqualification arising from remarriage. (Section 24)

(2) Disqualification arising on account of commission of murder. (Section 25)

(3) Disqualification arising from conversion. (Section 26)

4
Mulla, Hindu Law, LexisNexis, Updated 21st Edn, 2013, p 72.
5
R B S S Munnalal v S S Rafkumar AIR 1962 SC 1493, [1962] Supp 3 SCR 418
6
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/disqualifications-for-inheritance/articleshow/1391104.cms
7
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1391104.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campai
gn=cppst

9|Page
The old division of disqualifications of heirs into physical, mental, moral, religious and equitable
has been dispensed with under the present Act. In Khagendra Nath Ghosh v. Karunadhar8, the
Calcutta High Court lays down that excepting sections 24, 25 and 26 there is no other provision
under the Act which provides for disqualifications of heirs to succeed. These sections do not
disqualify any female heir on the ground of her unchastity or leading an immoral life. Thus the
unchastity of wife does not exclude her from claiming inheritance in the property of her husband,
nor could she be divested of the property which she has once inherited on the ground that she has
become unchaste.

8
AIR 1978 Cal 431, 82 CWN 979

10 | P a g e
 2. GROUNDS FOR DISQUALIFICATION

According to Hindu law, the inheritance rights of person were not absolute. Despite the nearness
of relationship, a person could still be disqualified from inheriting property on account of his
certain physical or mental sickness, or a definite conduct .this exclusion from inheritance was not
merely on religious grounds , an incapability to perform religious rites, but depended upon social
and moral grounds and bodily defects as well.

Disqualifications of succession in Hindu law are given under Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Basically, S. 24 to S. 28 deals with the disqualifications of succession. Under this Act the
disqualifications are divided in three types:-

1. Widows re-marriage (S. 24)9

2. A murderer (S.25)

3. Conversion of other religion (S. 26)

 WIDOWS RE-MARRIAGE

“Any heir who is related to an intestate as the widow of a predeceased son, the widow of a
predeceased son of a predeceased son or the widow of a brother shall not be entitled to succeed
to the property of the intestate as such widow, if on the date the succession opens, she has
remarried.”10

1. Purpose of the section

In the objects and reasons appended to Hindu Succession Bill 13 of 1954(S. 28 of these bill
corresponds to S.24 of the said Act) it was stated “the principle underlying this clause is that the
widow is the surviving half of her husband, and therefore, when she remarries, she ceases to
continue to be such (Section 2 of the Hindu Widow Remarriage Act, 1856), on this basis
divested the inheritance already vested in the widow on her remarriage. As the law stands,
remarriage disables a widow of a gotraja sapinda from succeeding to the property of a male
Hindu when on the date succession opens, she has ceased to be the widow of a gotraja
sapinda by reason of remarriage.”

2. Applicability of the section:

9
Now, Section 24, omitted by Act 39 of 2005, Section 5(w.e.f 9-9-2005).
10
S. 24 OF Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

11 | P a g e
The section applies only to intestate succession. The testamentary succession is away from the
capacity of this section, since a testator has power to lay down in his will any conditions on
which a beneficiary will take the inheritance. The section applies only to Class I and Class II
heirs of a Hindu male. It is submitted that the question of its application in other cases does not
arise, as cognates and agnates are all blood relations. In fact, even among Class I and Class II
heir’s only five heirs are relations by affinity. These are: (1) intestate’s own widow, (2) son’s
widow (3) son’s son’s widow (4) father’s widow (5) brother’s widow. The first three are in Class
I and last two are in Class II, category (VI). Of these the question of intestate’s widow’s
remarriage before succession opens does not arise and its reason is already been explained
above. Only father’s widow is allowed to inherit even if she had married. The other three widows
are disqualified under this section.11

 CONVERSION IN OTHER RELIGION

“Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a Hindu has ceased or ceases to be a
Hindu by conversion to another religion, children born to him or her after such conversion and
their descendants shall be disqualified from inheriting the property of any of their Hindu
relatives, unless such children or descendants are Hindus at the time when the succession
opens.”12

1. Scope of the section:

Under the old Hindu law conversion by a Hindu to another religion was a disqualification which
was removed by the Caste disabilities Removal Act, 1850. Even under this Act, when a Hindu
becomes a convert to another religion he continues to have a right to inherit from his Hindu
relative but descendants of a convert are disqualified from inheriting the intestate. It is laid down
under this section that where a Hindu ceased to be a Hindu by converting to any religion whether
before or after the commencement of this Act, the children born to him or her after such
conversion and their descendants shall be disqualified from inheriting the property of any of their
Hindu relatives unless children or descendants are Hindus when the succession opens.

2. Applicability

This section has no application to testamentary succession where the terms of the testament
govern the rules of succession but it is only applicable to intestate succession.

Consequence of disqualification

Under this section a disqualified heir is deemed to have died before the intestate, it follows that
no person can claim the right of inheritance to the property of the intestate through him or her.
The word ‘before’ used in the section makes it abundantly clear that the property does not vest in

11
Dr. Paras Diwan, Law of Intestate and Testamentary Succession, Ed. 2nd , universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
12
Section 27 of Indian Succession Act, 1956.

12 | P a g e
the disqualified heir, and if it does not vest in him, he cannot be the medium of passing property
to others. In other, words a disqualified heir cannot be a fresh stock of descent and a person
claiming through the disqualified heir cannot succeed. But it makes no difference to the
application of the rule whether the convert ceased to be a Hindu before or after the
commencement of this Act.

 A MURDERER

“A person who commits murder or abets the commission of murder shall be disqualified from
inheriting the property of the person murdered, or any other property in furtherance of the
succession to which he or she committed or abetted the commission of the murder.”13

1. Purpose of the section:

The doctrinaire theory that provisions of a statute of distribution are paramount and forbid the
consideration of any disqualification not contained in the statute itself was discountenanced by
the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The section has the effect of lying down that a
person who commits Murder or abets the commission of murder is disqualified from inheriting

(1) The property of the person murdered; or

(2) Any other property he may become entitled to succeed by reason Of furtherance of
succession resulting from the murder.

It is not compulsory for the appliance of this section that the person Disqualified should have
been convicted of murder or abetment of murder. The disqualification will apply if it is
established in any following proceeding that the person to be disqualified had committed or
abetted the murder. It stands that a person Prosecuted for murder but acquitted of the charge
would not be disqualified. Thus if the case was one of suicide and there was no case of
abatement, such a person would not be disqualified.

2. Application of the Section:

The section applies to both testamentary and intestate succession. the section definitely applies in
the cases where the property is to be inherited as per the Act but it also applies where the testator
has left behind the will. The principle of this section applies also to testamentary succession.14

 COMMISSION OF MURDER

Murder means to kill or to assassinate and it is to be understood in its popular sense 15, and not in
the technical rigid, and beyond reasonable doubt proof oriented sense of the Indian Penal Code.

13
S. 25 of Indian Succession Act, 1956
14
Mani V. Paru ; AIR 1960 ker. 195 at 196.
15
Minoti v. Sushal Mohan Singh, AIR 1982 Bom 68.

13 | P a g e
An acquittal from the criminal courts on the basis of benefit of doubt16, or because the
prosecution could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, may still disentitle a person from
inheriting the property of the intestate whom he killed. But where an heir is charged with the
murder of an intestate but is acquitted by the criminal court as her involvement in the murder is
not established at all, such an heir is not disqualified and her inheritance rights would be intact.
In sarita chauwhan V. Chetan Chauwhan17 the wife was accused of murdering her husband
abetment to commit murder along with three persons and was denied succession certificates in
view of sec. 25 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. In light of clear acquittal by the criminal
courts, the Bombay High Court held that as there was nothing to suggest that she could have
been involved in any way with the murder of her husband, she was entitled to succeed to her
property.

A murder committed under grave and sudden provocation, or even to save one’s own life or the
life of some other person, might be looked upon sympathetically under criminal law, but it would
not place the heir differently from a case where he kills the intestate through meticulous planning
and a well-executed murder. The civil courts are not normally bound by the verdict of criminal
courts18, and they can assess the case independently. In Rani Chandha V. State of NCT of
Delhi19, the husband was held guilty of committing the murder of his wife within a few year of
the marriage. She had left behind property including a flat that she had purchased before her
marriage. In accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the property
constituted her general property and as she had died issueless, her husband would normally have
succeeded her property, but in accordance with the previous of Sec. 25, as he was the one who
had murdered her, it was held that he was disqualified from inheriting her property. Similarly,
in Vellikannu V. R. Singaperumal20, the son murdered his father and was convicted by the
Court. As he was disqualified from inheriting the property of the deceased, his wife claimed the
same on the ground that since the murderer would be deemed to be dead she would be regarded
as the widow of the predeceased son and eligible to inherit the property as the intestate’s class-I
heir. It was held that neither the son nor his wife was eligible to claim inheritance. However, if
there is a finding of the criminal court that the claimant id not the murderer and the deceased had
committed suicide, then there is no bar to the claimant being granted a share in the property of
the deceased.21

 ABETS THE COMMISSION OF MURDER

The commission of murder of the intestate or the abetting of the commission of murder has the
same consequences. Where, for example, the whole planning of the murder of the intestate Is

16
AIR 1970 AP407
17
AIR 2007 Bom 133
18
AIR 1924 PC 209.
19
AIR 2007 Del 107
20
(2005) 6 SCC 622.
21
G.S. Sadashiva V. M.C. Srinivasam, AIR 2001 Kant. 453.

14 | P a g e
done by A, and B and C, who are the nephews of the intestate, help A in the commission of the
murder, by bringing the intestate on a false pretext to the spot where A kills him, B and C might
not have murdered the intestate, but because they abetted the commission of the murder, they
will be disqualified from inheriting the property of the intestate.

 MURDER COMMITTED IN FURTHERANCE OF SUCCESSION

Where a person commits the murder, not of the intestate, but of his heir, the removal will
accelerate the succession in his favour, such murderer is again disqualified from inheriting the
property of the deceased.

For example, a family consists of a Hindu male A, his father F, and a son of his predeceased
brother BS.

In terms of priority, on the death of A, it is the father who would inherit his property and not BS,
as the son of a predeceased brother has an inferior placement in comparison to the father. In
apprehension of A’s death, if BS commits the murder of the father of A, on the death of A,
despite being the closest relation, he (BS) would be disqualified from inheriting the property of
the intestate. Here again, he may personally kill the father or take somebody’s help in its
commission or abet its commission, the consequences will be the same.

The rule of disqualification on ground of commission of murder or abetting it is applicable to

both intestate as well as testamentary succession.

15 | P a g e
 3. EXCEPTION TO DISQUALIFICATION

No person may be disqualified from succeeding to any property on the ground of any disease,
defect, deformity or, except as provided under the Hindu Succession Act 1956, on any other
ground whatsoever. The disabilities mentioned in the Act are exhaustive and several of the
disabilities cast by the old Hindu law have become inoperative. Even unchastity of a woman is
not a ground of disinheritance now. However, a woman who was disinherited owing to
unchastity or remarriage before the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 may not
seek to reopen the succession and claim a share after the Hindu Succession Act 1956 since the
statutory provision is not retrospective.22

 UNCHASTITY
Prior to the passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, unchastity of a widow disentitled her to
inheritance. It was necessary that unchastity should have existed at the time when inheritance
opened. A woman’s subsequent unchastity did not divest the estate vested in her when chaste.23

Under the Mitakshara, unchastity was a ground of excluding only the widow, so that a daughter,
a mother or a sister could inherit, even though not quite chaste at the time when inheritance
opened.

Unchastity was no ground of exclusion in respect of succession to stridhana property24. So far as

succession to other property was concerned, according to the Mitakshara School, the obligation
of chastity was imposed only on the widow; unchastity did not disqualify either the daughter or
any other woman who took as heir25

Chastity was a condition precedent to the taking by the widow of her husband’s estate, unless the
unchastity was condoned by him. But once she inherited the property, she was not liable to
forfeit it by subsequent unchastity.26

The disqualification on the ground of unchastity was not removed by the Hindu Woman’s Right
to Property Act.

Now, under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, unchastity is not a ground for exclusion from
inheritance, and the said Act specifically provides that no person shall be disqualified from
succession to any property on the ground of any disease, defect or deformity, and save as

22
http://www.shareyouressays.com/knowledge/what-are-the-disabilities-and-disqualifications-attached-to-
hindus-under-the-un-codified-hindu-law-of-inheritance/117217
23
(Gangadhar v. Yellu, 36 Bom. 138)
24
(Advyapa v. Rudrova, 4 Bom. 104
25
(Akoba Laxman v. Sai Ganu, I.L.R. (1941) Bom. 438)
26
(Parvati v. Bhiku, 4 Bom. H.C. (A.C.J.) 25)

16 | P a g e
provided in the Act, on any other ground whatsoever. Unchastity is not a ground provided in the
said Act as a ground disqualifying from inheritance, and hence, unchastity does not now exclude
a person from inheritance.27

 CONGENITAL PHYSICAL AND MENTAL DEFECTS

Prior to Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the only defects which disqualified a person from
inheritance of taking a share on partition were congenital lunacy or idiocy.

S. 2 of the Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act provides as follows :

“Notwithstanding any rule of Hindu law or custom to the contrary, no person governed by the
Hindu law, other than a person who is and has been from birth a lunatic or idiot shall be
excluded from inheritance or from any right or share in joint family property by reason only of
any disease, deformity, or physical or mental defect.”

The Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act came into force on 20th September, 1928,
and it applies to all Hindus, except those governed by the Dayabhaga school. Under the pure
Hindu law, there were many defects and deformities which excluded a person from inheritance,
e.g., blindness, deafness, dumbness if both congenital and incurable, idiocy, leprosy and other
incurable disease. Under this Act, the only defects which disqualify an heir from inheritance or
from a share on partition are congenital lunacy and congenital idiocy28.

Prior to the passing of this Act, a person afflicted with blindness, deafness and dumbness, idiocy,
loss of a limb or organ—all these being congenital—or with insanity, or hideous and loathsome
diseases of an incurable type, was excluded from inheritance or from claiming a share on the
partition. But the said Act declares that no physical or mental affliction excepting (1) congenital
lunacy, or (2) congenital idiocy, shall operate as a bar to such a claim.

But now, under section 28 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, any disease, defect or deformity
no longer disqualifies a person from inheritance, and such a person can inherit the property of his
intestate relation. Congenital lunacy or idiocy is thus no longer a ground of disqualification.29

27
http://www.shareyouressays.com/knowledge/what-are-the-disabilities-and-disqualifications-attached-to-
hindus-under-the-un-codified-hindu-law-of-inheritance/117217
28
https://www.nrilegalservices.com/inheritance-under-hindu-succession-act-who-can-who-cannot/
29
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228226285_Disqualification_to_Succession_Under_Hindu_Successio
n_Act_1956

17 | P a g e
 4. RELATED CASE LAWS

 Vallikannu v R Singaperumal30

Hindu Succession Act 1956 s 25; under old Hindu law also, the murderer was to be treated as
non-existent and he might not form the stock of fresh descent. The objects and reasons for
enacting the Hindu Succession Act 1956 s 25 read as under: any person is disqualified from
inheriting any property under this Act, it will be deemed as if such person had died before the
intestate. That shows that a person who has murdered a person through whom he wants to inherit
the property stands disqualified on that account. That means he will be deemed to have
predeceased him. The effect of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 s 25 read with s 27 is that a
murderer is totally disqualified to succeed to the estate of deceased. The framers of the Hindu
Succession Act 1956 in the objects and reasons have made a reference to the decision of the
Privy Council that the murderer is not to be regarded as the stock of a fresh line of descent but
must be regarded as non-existent. That means that a person who is guilty of committing the
murder may not be treated to have any relationship whatsoever with deceased’s estate. Once the
son is totally disinherited then his whole stock stands disinherited, i.e., wife or son.

 Mobinder Kaur v Wassam Singh Kundan Singh31

The judgement in this case read down s 27 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956 and gathered an
intention to disinherit the widow and daughters in respect of the share of a son who stood
disqualified to take the bequest of his father by murdering the latter. The other son who had been
granted the bequest along with the murderer was held entitled to the whole of the estate.

 Asoke Naidu v Raymond S Mulu32

It was held in this case that after a person converts from Hinduism to any other religion, his
property may not be governed by the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act 1956, but he is
not himself disqualified from succeeding to his Hindu relative. A succession certificate sought
by the brother (converted to Christianity) to the effects of his deceased (Hindu) sister was
accordingly granted).

 Jamuna Das v Board of Revenue33

It was held that the principle of disqualification applies only with respect to succession under the
Hindu Succession Act 1956 and not with respect to succession in any other enactment like the
Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act 1951 s 174

30
(2005) 6 SCC 622
31
AIR 1968 P&H 389, (1968) 70 Punj LR 564
32
AIR 1976 Cal 272, (1976) 3 Cal HC 226(N)
33
AIR 1973 All 397

18 | P a g e
 5. CONCLUSION

The principle of equality is equated with “sameness treatment” in an essentially unequal society.
Law of disqualification under HSA is dealt by S. 24 to 28 and with respect to these sections a
person can be disqualified only in case of remarriage by few widows expressly mentioned in the
section, when a person commits murder for furtherance of property and when a person is a
descendant of a convert. Under only these three circumstances a person can be disqualified to
inherit and rest all disqualifications common under old Hindu Law are abolished. According to
my view the following should be included in the disqualification of succession there is no doubt
that these sections enacted by the legislatures are well founded and it has done a great job in
providing few specific grounds of disqualifications. But in respect to above discussion it is
submitted that few other grounds of disqualifications should be added in addition to those
already mentioned and they are as follows:

1. A person torturing another person should also be disqualified to inherit the property of
that another person.

2. Attempt of murder should also be a ground to disqualification to succession even that

attempt was unsuccessful under S.25.

3. Unchaste women should also be disqualified.

4. Stepmother of the deceased person should be disqualified on remarriage under S.24 of

HSA, 1956.

5. A person committing rape of the lady from whom he is going to inherit should also be
disqualified.

Hence it is submitted that the present law of disqualification under HSA is appropriate for Hindu
law and as such there is no need for any kind of change or alteration in these law except that
some other grounds of disqualifications as mentioned above should also be added in Hindu
Succession Act, 1956.

19 | P a g e
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 BOOKS:-

1. Dr. Paras Diwan, Law of Intestate and Testamentary Succession, Ed. 2nd , universal Law
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.

 WEBSITES:-

1. http://www.advocatekhoj.com
2. http://www.shareyouressays.com
3. http://indiacode.nic.in
4. http://www.lawyersclubindia.com
5. http://www.lexisnexis.com
6. https://racolblegal.com
7. https://www.nrilegalservices.com

20 | P a g e