FEMINIST JUSTICE BY WAY OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS TO

PROPERTY: AN INDIAN APPROACH AFTER

INDEPENDENCE

Author - Divya Singh

LL.M (2020-2021)
School of Law, Galgotias University

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 ABSTRACT

In India, for ages Hindu women faced discrimination within the families w.r.t their property
rights. Before independence women’s property was divided into 2 heads, stridhan & woman’s
estate. Some restrictions were there on her power of disposal, if she was a married woman. The
old law of stridhan and woman’s estate was abolished by Hindu Succession Act,1956. The
amendment made in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in year 2005 has granted equal rights to
daughters as that of son in the Hindu joint family. However, there were problems with the
interpretation of this provision, which has been clarified by the Supreme Court in recent
judgement of 2020.

This paper aims to study the women’s property rights before independence and what loopholes
were present in those rights. The paper also studies the laws present today which provides
woman equal share in the property.

The paper highlights the judicial developments in the Hindu Succession Act, where laws have
been interpreted by the Court to grant Indian women equal share in the property as that of men.

Keywords: Women’s property rights, Hindu succession Act 1956, gender justice.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 1. INTRODUCTION

Justice is a complex concept and touches every aspect of human life. The word Justice has been
derived from the Latin word Jungere meaning ‘to bind or to tie together’. The word ‘Jus’ also
means ‘Tie’ or ‘Bond’. In this way Justice can be defined as a system in which men are tied or
joined in a close relationship. Justice seeks to harmonise different values and to organise upon
it all human relations. As such, Justice means bonding or joining or organising people together
into a right or fair order of relationships.1

According to jurists-
Blackstone - “Justice is a reservoir from where the concept of right, duty, and equity
evolves.”

Salmond - “Though every man wants to be righteous and just towards him he himself being
‘selfish’ by nature may not be reciprocal in responding justly.” According to him, some kind
of external force is necessary for maintaining an orderly society, and without justice it is
unthinkable.

The term feminism is used to define a political, cultural or economic movement intended to
establish equal rights and legal protection for women.

Feminist legal theory, also known as feminist jurisprudence, is based on the belief that the law
has been fundamental in women's historical subordination. The project of feminist legal theory
is twofold. First, feminist jurisprudence seeks to explain ways in which the law played a role
in women's former subordinate status. Second, feminist legal theory is dedicated to changing
women's status through a rework of the law and its approach to gender.2

Feminist jurisprudence is a philosophy of law based on the political, economic, and social
equality. As a field of legal scholarship, feminist jurisprudence began in 1960s. It influences
many debates on sexual and domestic violence, inequality in the workplace, and gender-based
discrimination. Through various approaches, feminists have identified implications of

1
Speech on justice: Meaning & types of justice available at: https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/speech/speech-
on-justice-meaning-and-types-of-justice/40361( visited on January 20, 2021)
2
Feminist jurisprudence and its impact in India available at:
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1859-feminist-jurisprudence-and-its-impact-in-india-an-
overview.html( Visited on January 20, 2021)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

seemingly neutral laws and practices. Laws affecting employment, divorce, reproductive
rights, rape, domestic violence, and sexual harassment have all benefited from the analysis and
insight of feminist jurisprudence.3

Rights are that sort of tool given to citizens in every country which empowers the citizen to
live peacefully in the country. These rights are equally distributed among men and women of
the country but in this world, there are so many countries where still the rights of women are
hampered in every aspect it can be civil, political, fundamental and rights related to the property
are recognized in very fewer countries because still the property rights of women are limited
and regulated by social norms, customs and legislation hampering their economic status. There
are so many countries where women constitute the major part of doing agricultural work but
their economic status is very low because they are not the owner of the land. If women will
become the owner of the land it will empower them by providing income and security. To
secure the women in every aspect there are so many steps have been taken internationally and
as well as taken by the Indian government also. Since it is also enshrined in provisions of the
constitution such as in Article 14, 15 and also in Directive Principles of State Policy regarding
gender equality but when we talk about property rights still there are some lacunae which need
to filled and some are filled already.4

2. Women’s property rights before independence

Before Hindu Succession Act 1956, the property of a woman was divided into two heads: (A)
Stridhan and (b) woman’s Estate. The Right to Property Act, 1937 conferred some new rights
of inheritance on certain Hindu females which had the effect of increasing the bulk of woman’s
estate, but apart from its side effects on the joint family property, it did not alter the basic
division of women’s property into stridhan and woman’s estate.

The word Stridhan means women’s property. The Smritikars differ on from each other as to
what kind of property constitute her Stridhan. According to Smritikars, the stridhan constituted
those properties which a woman received by way of gifts from the relatives which included
mostly movable property (though sometimes a house or a piece of land was also given to her
as gift), such as ornaments, jewellery and dresses. The gift made to her by strangers at the time

3
Supra note 1.
4
Empowering women through Property Rights - Law Times Journal

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

of the marriage (before the nuptial fire), or at the time of bridal procession also constituted her
stridhan.

Characteristic features of stridhan

The pre- 1956 Hindu law classified stridhan from various aspects so as to determine its
characteristics features; such as the source from which the property was acquired, the status at
the time of acquisition, i.e., whether the female was maiden, married or widow and the school
to which she belonged.

-The stridhan being a woman’s absolute property, she has full rights of its alienation. This
suggests that she can sell, gift, mortgage, lease and exchange. This is entirely true if she is a
maiden or a widow. Some restrictions were recognised on her power of disposal, if she was a
married woman. If she was a married woman, the stridhan was classified under two heads: (a)
the Saudayaka (it means gift of love and affection), (b) the non Saudayaka, i.e., all other kinds
of stridhan like gifts from stranger, property acquired by self -exertion or mechanical art. Over
the former a female had full rights of disposal but over the latter she had no right of alienation
without the consent of her husband and husband also had the power to use it.

-She constituted an independent stock of descent. On her death all kinds of the stridhan passed
to her own heirs.

The pre-1956 Hindu Law laid down a different law of succession to stridhan. The law was
different in different schools and it was different for different kinds of the stridhan.

The old law of succession to stridhan has been abrogated by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
The new Law of succession to women’s property has been laid down in sections 15 and 16 of
the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Characteristic Features of women’s estate

The next type of property was women’s estate and the following properties were included in
it-

1. Property obtained by inheritance- A Hindu female may inherit property from a male or
a female. She may inherit it from her parent’s side or from her husband’s side. The
Mitakshara considered all inherited property as stridhan. But Privy Council in a series
of decisions held such property as woman’s estate. In one set of cases, the Privy Council

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 held that property inherited by a female from male is not her Stridhan but woman’s
estate.5 In other cases it took the same view regarding property inherited from females.
As to the property inherited from a male, the female heirs are divided into two parts:
(a) those who are introduced into the father’s gotra by marriage, such as intestate’s
widow, mother, etc; and (b) females who are born in the family, such as daughters,
sisters, brother’s daughters etc. In the latter case the inherited property is her stridhan,
while in the former case it is woman’s estate. After the coming into force of the Hindu
Succession Act, 1956, a female takes all inherited property as her stridhan.

2. Share obtained on partition- In Devi Prasad v Mahadeo6 the law was laid down that
share obtained on partition was women’s estate and not Stridhan. This property is also
now her absolute property or stridhan after The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into
force.

The characteristic feature of women’s estate was that a woman was a limited owner of the
property. They were two limitations that were positioned on her estate-

a) She couldn’t ordinarily alienate the corpus.

b) On her death the property devolved upon the subsequent heir of the last full owner

In Janki v Narayanaswami7, the Privy Council held that: “Her right is of the nature of right of
property, her position is that of owner; her powers in that character are however limited… So
long as she is alive, no one has vested interest in succession.”

With regard to these properties, a woman had power of

➢ Management
➢ Alienation
➢ Surrender

Power of Management: Like the Karta of a Hindu Joint Family, a woman had full power of
management. The Karta is a co-owner of the joint family, there being other coparceners, but
she was the only owner. She alone was entitled to the possession of the whole estate and she
was entitled to its total income. She had absolute power of spending the income. She need not
save but if she saved that, it shall be considered her stridhan. A female alone could sue on

5
Bhagwandeen v. Maya Baee, (1867)11 M.A.I. 487
6
(1912)39 I.A. 121.
7
(1963) 43 I.A. 207

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

behalf of the estate and she alone could be sued with respect to it. She remains its owner until
the forfeiture of estate, by her re-marriage, adoption, death or surrender.

Power of Alienation: The female being a holder of limited estate had limited powers of
alienation. Like the Karta her powers were limited and she could alienate property only in
exceptional cases. She could alienate the property for:

1. A Legal necessity i.e for her own need and for the need of dependents of the last full
owner,

2. For the benefit of the estate, and

3. For the discharge of indispensable religious duties like marriage of daughters, funeral
rites of her husband and gifts to brahmans for salvation of his soul etc. She could
alienate for the advantage of the last full owner but not for her own spiritual benefit.
She could alienate for religious acts that are not obligatory but are still pious
observances which conduce to the bliss of her deceased husband’s soul.

Power to Surrender: Surrender means renunciation of the estate by the female owner. In
Natwar v Dadu8, the Supreme Court held that it is the self-effacement by the widow that forms
the basis of surrender and not the ex - facie transfer by which the effacement is brought about.
For a valid surrender, the first condition is that it must be of the entire estate, though she may
retain a small portion for her maintenance. The second condition is that it must be made in
favour of the reversioner or reversioners, in case there are more than one of the same category.
Surrender can be made in favour of female reversioners. The third and last condition is that
surrender must be bona fide, and not a device of dividing the estate among the reversioners.
When a Hindu female surrenders her estate, the estate vests in the reversioners by the operation
of law, and no act of acceptance by the reversioner is necessary.

Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, has abolished women’s estate, yet reversioners are
still relevant in respect of women’s estate alienated by her before June 17, 1956.9

The Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937

8
Natwar v. Dadu 1954 S.C. 61.
9
Bakshri Ram v. Brij lal, 1995 S.C 395.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

Its Effect on law of Succession- In respect of separate property of a Mitakshara Hindu and in
respect of all properties of a Dayabhaga Hindu, the Act introduced three widows viz.,
intestate’s own widow, his son’s widow, and his son’s son’s widow as heirs along with the son,
grandson and great grandson, as also in their default. The widow took a share equal to the share
of a son and in default of the son she took the whole property and If there were more than one
widow, all of them together took one share in the property. In case of the Mitakshara joint
family property, the widow of a deceased coparcener took the same interest in the property
which her deceased husband had in the joint family property at the time of his death. In all
cases the widow took a woman’s estate in the property.

The Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937 was abolished by the Hindu Succession Act,
1956. This act recognized the three widows; though it gave them only limited estate. This Act
also gave these widows a share in the undivided interest of a Mitakshara coparcener. But the
Act was not applicable if the deceased had disposed of his property by will. It was also not
applicable to agricultural lands.

The woman’s estate has now been converted into stridhan by S.14, Hindu Succession Act,1956.
If a Hindu female gets any property after June 17, 1956, that will be her absolute property
unless specifically given to her with limitation.10 The woman’s estate over which she has
possession when the Act came into force (June7,1956) is converted into her absolute estate.
The old Hindu law of woman’s estate and reversioners is still relevant in respect of property
over which she had no possession when the Act came into force.

3. Women’s Property Rights Post- Independence

The Hindu Succession Act 1956, has introduced major changes in the Hindu law of woman’s
property. Section 14, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 has put an end to woman’s estate and has
introduced Vijnaneshwara’s interpretation of Stridhan.

10
See sub-section (2) Section 14,Hindu Succession Act,1956.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 ➢ Section 14. Hindu Succession Act, 1956- Property of a female Hindu to be her
absolute property:

Sub section (1) of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act says that: “Any property possessed
by a Hindu female, whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be
held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner.”
Explanation to S.14 explains the meaning of the term ‘property’ in this context. The
explanation runs as follows:
“In this sub-section ‘property’ includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a
female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of
maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her
marriage, or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other
manner whatsoever, and also any such property held by her as stridhan immediately before the
commencement of this Act.”11

It may be seen that the above definition of property includes all the heads of Vijnaneshwar’s
enumeration of property.

Under S. 14. (1), any property acquired by a Hindu female, except that which is covered by
Sub section (2), before the Act came into force and which is in her possession when the Act
came into force will become her absolute property, and the property acquired by a Hindu
female, except that which is covered by sub-section (2), after the commencement of this Act,
will be her absolute property. Once her limited estate become her full estate by virtue of S.14,
a Hindu female can alienate it by gift or otherwise.12

Explanation to S.14(1) has expanded the notion of ownership and includes all types of property
acquired by any method it mentions. When some property is allotted to the widow in lieu of
her claim for maintenance, she becomes its absolute owner.13
So, section 14 gives absolute right to property to the female, to both properties acquired before
and after the act.

11
Section 14, The Hindu Succession Act,1956
12
Mahabir v. Shashi Bhushan, 1981 Cal. 74.
13
V. Tulsamma v. Sesha Reddy, AIR 1977 SC 1944.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 a) Pre-Act woman’s estate

Section 14 has been given retrospective effect. This section converts existing woman’s estate
into stridhan or absolute estate. Two conditions are necessary: (a) Ownership of property must
vest in her, and (b) she must be in possession of the estate when the Act came into force.
She must be the owner of the property. It is well established that if a Hindu female has no title
to the property, she will not become its absolute owner, even though she is in its possession.
The Supreme Court in a case held that: “The word ‘possessed’ in S.14 is used in the broad
sense and in the context means the state of owning or having in one’s hand or power.”14

b) Post -Act women’s property

Any property that a Hindu woman acquires after the coming into force of the Act will be her
absolute property unless given to her with limitations. Thus, property obtained on succession
or on partition will be her absolute property. Sub- section (2) of section 14 Hindu Succession
Act, 1956, lays down the limitations. According to sub-section (2) of section 14: “Nothing
which is contained in sub-section 1 shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or will
or under any other instrument or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award
where terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a
restricted estate in that property.” This sub-section established a principle of law which is; if
grant is given subject to some restrictions, the grantee will take the grant subject to those
restrictions.

➢ Section 15, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 lays down General Rules of
Succession in the case of female Hindus- Although Hindu woman’s limited
estate has been abolished and, so long as the woman is alive, she has absolute
power over all types of property (She is also free to dispose it of by will), yet
for the purpose of intestate succession, the source of property is still material.
The old Hindu law of succession to the property of a Hindu female (stridhan)

14
Gummalapura v. Setra 1959 S.C. 577

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 was extremely complicated. The modern law of succession to the property of a
Hindu female is simple though it suffers from some bad draftsmanship.
According to section 15 of Hindu Succession Act,1956 the property of a female Hindu dying
intestate shall devolve according to the rules set out in section 16-
a. Firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or
daughter) and the husband;
b. Secondly, upon the heirs of the husband;
c. Thirdly, upon the mother and father;
d. Fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and
e. Lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

For the purpose of succession, the property of a Hindu female falls under the following three
heads:
(a) Property inherited by a female by her father or mother,
(b) Property inherited by a female from her husband or father-in-law
(c) Property obtained from any other source, by inheritance or otherwise.

It should be noted that the former two heads would become operative only if the female dies
issueless. If she has her issues, the distinction between the sources from which she got the
property is not material.

4. Hindu Daughter’s Right to Property

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, had undergone a lot of change by virtue of the Hindu
Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. The Section 6 of the said Act has been completely
replaced by a new provision. A Daughter has also been made a coparcener by virtue of section
6(1) of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
This amendment is based on the 174th Law Commission of India on “Property Rights of women:
Proposed reforms under Hindu Law” under the chairmanship of Justice B.P Jeewan Reddy
dated 5th May 2000. This Commission recommended for the removal of irregularities and
ambiguities with regard to property rights of Hindu women under the Act of 1956. As per the
view of Law Commission, the exclusion of daughters from participating in coparcenary

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

property ownership merely by reason of gender was unjust. Therefore, this amendment Act
gives full -fledged property rights to daughters in ancestral property along with sons.

Based on the recommendations of 174th Law Commission comes the Hindu Succession
(Amendment) Act 2005 which entitled Hindu women to be the coparceners in the property of
their ancestors. Section 6 went under a major amendment, through which the daughters got the
equal rights over the ancestral property. It basically told that the daughters have a right to be a
coparcener since birth which cannot be taken away. And she has equivalent rights as that of
the son. It ended the age- old tradition of giving the property only to the male heirs when the
owner dies intestate. The effect of this act was that women were now able to become
the Karta of the family and enjoy the right of the partition. Also, now she can be entitled to
enjoy the property as an absolute owner. 15

After coming into force of the abovementioned act, there arose a problem w.r.t. enforcement
of the amendment. The Supreme Court tried to solve the problem in three different cases. The
first case was Prakash v. Phulavati16 in which the court held that the property rights of
daughters are prospective in their application, i.e; to be available only if both the father and the
daughter are alive on the date of commencement of the 2005 Amendment Act. After this
judgment, in the year 2018, in the case Danamma v Amar Singh17 the court held that if the
father may have died before 2005, then also the daughter can be benefited from this
amendment. This judgment caused a lot of confusion because both the cases were decided by
2 judges’ bench and created a lot of confusion (as to which case should be followed). And
Finally, in the year 2020, in the landmark judgment Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma18 the
court resolved a long- standing confusion and held that Father need not be alive till 2005. The
daughter has the coparcenary right since birth and hence can be entitled to the property of the
father who may be alive or not.

The Court finally concluded as under in Vineeta Sharma case:

15
Plight and struggles of Hindu women in the field of property rights : a historical study - iPleaders (Visited on
January 20, 2021).
16
(2016)1 SCC (civ)549
17
(2018)3 SCC 343
18
(2019) 6 SCC 162

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 a) The provisions contained in amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956
confer status of coparcener on the daughter born before or after amendment in the same
way as son with same rights and liabilities.
b) The rights can be claimed by the daughter born earlier with effect from 9.9.2005 with
savings as provided in Section 6(1) as to the disposition or alienation, partition or
testamentary disposition which had taken place before 20th day of December, 2004.
c) Since the right in coparcenary is by birth, it is not necessary that father coparcener
should be living as on 9.9.2005.
d) The statutory fiction of partition created by proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu
Succession Act, 1956 as originally enacted did not bring about the actual partition or
disruption of coparcenary. The fiction was only for the purpose of ascertaining share of
deceased coparcener when he was survived by a female heir, of Class I as specified in
the Schedule to the Act of 1956 or male relative of such female.
After the reformative Amending Act of 2005 and the interpretation of the same in the instant
judgment, the Mitakshara coparcenary has been diluted to a greater degree and will be more or
less nothing but a relic of the past. Now with the discernment of the legal position, it is expected
that the amendment will bring a much -needed change in the social status of daughters.
It has already taken 15 years since the amendment was incorporated, but now, the Supreme
court has paved the way by clearing the last hurdle and the onus is on the subordinate courts to
be the flag bearers of change.19
The judgement has finally put an end to male primacy in the sharing of ancestral property in
the Hindu family. It has also ruled that registered settlements relating to sharing or alienation
of property made before 2004, when the amendment was tabled in the Rajya Sabha, can’t be
reopened. This was to avoid disputes and litigation that would have resulted from giving
retrospective effect without limit to the ruling. But the Court has allowed opening of cases
settled on the basis of the basis of the 2005 cut-off date and told High Courts to decide such
cases within 6 months. The judgement is important because equal rights to property is a key

19
Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma: Clearing the last hurdle towards gender equality in Hindu property Law,
available at: https://www.barandbench.com/columns/vineeta-sharma-v-rakesh-sharma-gender-equality-hindu-
property-law (visited on January 20,2021).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

factor in ensuring the equality of women with men and in empowering them. It will make
gender justice more real to women.20

5. DOWRY LAWS

The Government had taken the first effort to combat with dowry system in India was by
enacting The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. This Act prohibits giving, taking or demanding
dowry and also punishes the person who does not follow the provisions. The biggest loophole
in the Dowry Prohibition Act is dowry is forbidden but the gifts are allowed.
Dowry and traditional presents made to the wife at the time of the marriage constitute her
Stridhan, and if the husband or her in-laws refuse to give it back to her, on her demand, they
would be guilty of Criminal Breach of Trust under IPC. Similarly. If any item of stridhan is
entrusted to them at the time of the marriage or thereafter and they refuse to give it to her on
demand, they would be guilty of Criminal Breach of Trust under Section 405 of Indian Penal
Code.21
Similarly, section 498 A was inserted in the Indian Penal code by Criminal Law Amendment
Act,1983 (Act 46 of 1983) under chapter XX A. According to S.498 A, whoever being the
husband or the relative of the husband subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Cruelty
under this section means harassment of a woman where such harassment is with a view to
coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or
valuable security.22
Section 304 B of Indian Penal Code which provides punishment for dowry death was inserted
by Act 43 of 1986. Which reads as under:
(1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or
occurs otherwise than under normal circumstances within seven years
of marriage and it is shown that soon before her death she was subjected

Women’s property rights: welcome ruling, available at: https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/first-

20

edit/women-s-property-rights-welcome-ruling-874554.html (Last Modified, August 18, 2020).

21
Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar,1985 S.C. 628.
22
Section 498 A of Indian Penal Code, 1860

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

 to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband
for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, such death shall be
called “dowry death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to
have caused her death.
Explanation- For the purpose of this sub- section, “dowry” shall have
the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
2. Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life.

6. MUSLIM WOMEN

In case of Muslim, inheritance laws are governed by personal law. There are four sources of
Islamic law governing this area- the Quran, the Sunna, the Ijma and the Qiyas. When a man
dies, both male and female become legal heirs, but the share of a female heir is typically half
of that of the male heirs. While two-third share of the property devolves equally among legal
heirs, one-third can be bequeathed as per his own wish.

Muslim Wives
A wife without any children is entitled to receive one-fourth of the share of the property of her
deceased husband, but those with children are entitled to one-eighth the share of the husband’s
property. If there is more than one wife, the share may diminish. In case of divorce, her parental
family has to provide maintenance after the Iddat period (three months).23

Muslim Daughter

23
Inheritance rights of women : How to protect them and how succession laws vary, available at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/plan/inheritance-rights-of-women-how-to-protect-them-and-how-
succession-laws-vary/articleshow/70407336.cms (Last Modified, July 29, 2019).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

A son always takes double the share of a daughter in the property of a deceased father.
However, the daughter is the absolute owner of the inherited property. In the absence of a son,
the daughter gets half the share of the inheritance. If there is more than one daughter, they
collectively receive two-thirds of the inheritance.

Muslim Mother

A mother is entitled to receive one-third share of her deceased son’s property if the latter dies
without any children, but will get a one-sixth share of a deceased son having children.

7. CHRISTIAN WOMEN

Christians are governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, specifically by the sections 31-49
of this Act. Under this, the heirs inherit equally irrespective of the gender.

Christian Wives

If the husband leaves behind both a widow and lineal descendants, she will get one-third the
share of his property, while the remaining two-thirds will go to the descendants. If there are no
lineal descendant, but other relatives are alive, one -half of the property will go to the widow
and the rest to the kindered. If there are no relatives, the entire property will go to the wife.
A Christian man can legally marry second time only after the death of the first wife or after
legally divorcing her. If he has a second wife, even if first wife is alive or not divorced, the
second wife or children will have no rights over his property. However, the children of a legally
divorced wife have an equal share over their father’s property as that of the second wife and
children.24

24
Inheritance rights of women : How to protect them and how succession laws vary, available at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/plan/inheritance-rights-of-women-how-to-protect-them-and-how-
succession-laws-vary/articleshow/70407336.cms( Last Modified, July 29, 2019).

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

Christian Daughters

A daughter has an equal right as her brother to the father’s property. She also has full rights
over her personal property upon attaining majority.

Christian Mother

If a person dies without a will, and has left no lineal descendants, then after deducting his
widow’s share, the mother will be entitled to receive an equal share as other surviving entitled
sharers.

CONCLUSION

The Hindu Succession Act, 2005 has brought a revolutionary change in the Succession by
removing discrimination and making a woman Karta of the Family.
Despite all the long strides our society has taken towards women empowerment and their rights
to property and inheritance, there are certain areas that require work. There are social issues
which need to be dealt with like Dowry demand, female infanticide, domestic violence etc. The
punishment for these crimes should be made stricter. And There is a need to raise awareness
among women about their rights relating to property so that they can fight for their rights. The
provision relating to inheritance of agricultural land and other forms of property rights should
be amended to grant equal rights to daughters in the property. And the personal laws of other
religion should be made gender friendly to remove disparity.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Statutes Referred
1. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956),
2. The Indian Succession Act, 1925
3. The Constitution of India, 1950

Textbooks

1. Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu Law (Allahabad Law Agency, 22nd edition, 2013)

Online Sources

• Feminist jurisprudence and its impact in India, available at:

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-1859-feminist-jurisprudence-
and-its-impact-in-india-an-overview.html (visited on January 20, 2021)

• Empowering women through Property Rights, available at:

http://lawtimesjournal.in/empowering-women-through-property-rights/
(visited on January 20, 2021)

• Women’s property rights: welcome ruling, available at:

https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/first-edit/women-s-property-rights-
welcome-ruling-874554.html (Last Modified, August 18, 2020)

• Inheritance rights of women : How to protect them and how succession laws
vary, available at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/wealth/plan/inheritance-rights-of-
women-how-to-protect-them-and-how-succession-laws-
vary/articleshow/70407336.cms ( Last modified, July 29, 2019)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/what-every-
woman-in-india-must-know-about-her-inheritance-
rights/articleshow/70606122.cms

• https://blog.ipleaders.in/plight-struggles-hindu-women-field-property-rights-
historical-study/

• Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma: Clearing the last hurdle towards gender
equality in Hindu property Law, available at:
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/vineeta-sharma-v-rakesh-sharma-
gender-equality-hindu-property-law (visited on January 20, 2021)

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3819134