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

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...