Skip to main content

A Hindu girl who converts her religion can still claim share in father’s property

The Gujarat High Court in a landmark judgment stated that even though a woman has converted to another religion after marriage she is nevertheless entitled to inherit her father’s ancestral property as per the Hindu Succession Act.

Justice JB Pardiwala, in a matter where a Hindu woman converted to Islam after marrying a Muslim man and renounced Hindu faith, does not disqualify her to inherit father’s property.

As per the Hindu Succession Act, if a person has converted then it does not disqualify her from claiming her share in the ancestral property. The Act only disqualifies the descendants of the convert who are born to the convert after such conversion from inheriting the property of any of their Hindu relatives.

In the present matter, the state revenue authorities were of the opinion that since she has renounced her religion voluntary and hence does not have any right to share in father’s property.

Nasimbanu Friozkhan Pathan from Vadodara renounced Hinduism and embraced Islam on July 11, 1990. Subsequently, she married Firoz Khan on January 25, 1991, as per the Muslim rituals.

In 2004, her father passed away leaving behind sizeable parcels in land in their village. However, her siblings opposed her claims and refused to enter her name in the list of claimants as she is no longer a Hindu.

The court explained as she voluntarily embraced Islam, the provisions of inheritance laws cannot be enforced in her case. After hearing the matter, Justice Pardiwala explained the applicability of provisions existing in Hindu Shastric laws for disqualification of Hindu women for succession or maintenance were kept aside.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more