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

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/

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...