Site icon Housing News

Can a widow demand partition of joint family property?

Nomination process doesn't override succession law: SC

After changes were made to the original law applicable to Hindus in 2005, daughters were given the same right into their parents’ property as sons.  Just like their brothers, daughters have also been provided with the right to demand partition of joint family property under the amended Hindu Success Act in the capacity of a coparcener.

However, as far as demanding partition is concerned, a widowed daughter-in-law does not have the same right as her sister-in-law in her husband’s family property even though she is counted among the Class-1 heirs of the deceased.

For the uninitiated, Class-1 heirs are the first contenders when a person dies and his estate is distributed among his heirs following the applicable law of succession. Class-I heir of the deceased include his widow, children and mother.

 

List of Class-I heirs under HSA

 

Who can demand partition of joint Hindu family property?

Every coparcener has the right to demand partition of the coparcenary property. The law clearly empowers the father, the son, the grandson, the great-grandson and the daughter the right to ask for partition of the common property. Even minor coparceners enjoy the same right as the adult coparceners.

However, since women who become part of such a family through matrimony are treated only a member and not a coparcener, they don’t enjoy similar rights as, say, the daughters.

Considering the right to demand partition lies with coparceners only, a widowed daughter-in-law does not have a clearly stated right to seek partition. However, in recent years, some judgements have been passing, where courts have advocated granting this right to widows.

“In the wake of the revolution for emancipation of women and for recognizing their rights as human beings equal to the males in respect of the properties in a Hindu family, I think depriving a widow simply because no other coparceners demand partition would clearly be destructive of the movement,” the Bombay High Court said in an order in 2014.

Got any questions or point of view on our article? We would love to hear from you. Write to our Editor-in-Chief Jhumur Ghosh at jhumur.ghosh1@housing.com

 

Was this article useful?
  • 😃 (0)
  • 😐 (0)
  • 😔 (0)
Exit mobile version