Skip to main content

Hindu woman absolute owner of property under Hindu Succession Act: Madras HC

The Madras High Court has made it clear that the moment property is given in favour of a Hindu woman, she becomes the absolute owner despite the restrictions and limitations contained in the settlement deed.

Justice S Vimala delivered the judgment while dismissing an appeal filed by Jayalakshmi Ammal, second wife of one Dharmarajapillai, against the order of Cuddalore District Court in favour of the sale of property by first wife Swarnathammal to Kaliaperumal.

Jayalakshmi Ammal contended that the power conferred under the settlement was only a limited one and not absolute.

Rejecting the contention,the judge said the express language used in the settlement deed interpreted in the light of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, would lead to the conclusion that what was conferred was only an absolute one and not a limited estate.

"Therefore the first wife has got every right to dispose the property and the sale is valid. Therefore purchaser of the property is succeeded and the appeal is dismissed."

Dharmarajapillai, who lived with Swarnathammal for 26 years, had married Jayalakshmi Ammal with the former's consent on November 19, 1965 as the couple had no children.

The same day Dharmarajapillai executed a settlement deed in which it was mentioned that she can enjoy the property till her lifetime and after that it will revert back to him.

The Judge said "the recitals in the documents reveal the expectation in the mind of the settler that he would get back the property at any cost. There is an assumption that the first wife will predecease him. He would live and enjoy the property after her death."

The judge said the amendment was brought to the Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act to take care of such documents existing with fraudulent intentions.

The section says "any property acquired by a Hindu Female before or after the commencement of this Act shall be held as full owner and not as a limited owner and hence the sale of property by the first wife is valid," the judge said.

While delivering the judgment, the judge made some observations about the status of married women who do not become pregnant.

"Though women are not alone the cause for the issue yet the problem of infertility has broken many homes, separated many couples and caused disharmony between the couples while they are living together," she observed.

She further said "the most inhumane form of insult is the husband, who getting married while the first wife is alive, trying to justify the second marriage in the name of giving gift of property to first wife."

Article referred: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/hindu-woman-absolute-owner-of-property-under-hindu-succession-act-madras-high-court/articleshow/34936219.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Vanishing promoters and languishing shareholders

Over Rs 60,000 crore of shareholders’ wealth is stuck in 1,450 companies suspended by the stock exchanges. More importantly, near 100 per cent pledging of promoter holding appears to be common in many of these companies. This, almost rules out any chance of the companies bouncing back. The suspension is for non-compliance of the listing norms. Vanishing Companies - Definition As per the definition stipulated by SEBI, any listed company, which raised moneythrough initial public offer and, thereafter, stopped operations, did not file returnseither with the RoC or SEBI and did not exist on the registered premises wastermed as vanishing.There are provisions under Companies Act under which companies are termedvanishing companies on satisfying certain conditions. it is provided a companywould be deemed to be a vanishing company, if it satisfies all the conditions given below : a) Failed to file returns with Registrar of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) Failed to fil