Divorced Daughter Not 'Dependant' U/S 21 Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, Not Entitled To Maintenance From Late Father's Estate: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that a divorced daughter is not a “dependent” under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and that she is not entitled to claim maintenance from the estate of her deceased father.

“An unmarried or widowed daughter is recognized to have a claim in the estate of the deceased, but a “divorced daughter” does not feature in the category of dependents entitled to maintenance,” a division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed.

The court made the observations while dismissing an appeal moved by a divorced daughter challenging a family court order rejecting her claim of maintenance from her mother and brother.

The woman’s father died in 1999 leaving behind four heirs i.e. his wife, son and two daughters. It was the woman’s case that she was not given any share.

She contended that her mother and brother agreed to pay Rs. 45,000 per month to her as maintenance, on an assurance that she would not press for her share in the property. She stated that she was given maintenance regularly only till November, 2014, and not thereafter.

It was also her case that her husband deserted her and she was granted ex parte divorce in September 2001. She claimed that the family court did not take into consideration that she did not receive any money, alimony or maintenance from her husband. She also submitted that since her husband was not traceable, she could not seek any alimony or maintenance from him.

“However difficult situation as it may be, but under the HAMA as she is not a “dependent” as defined under the Act and thus not entitled to claim maintenance from her mother and brother,” the court said while dismissing her appeal.

Section 21 of HAMA lists the "dependants" of a deceased. While it includes deceased's unmarried or widowed daughter, it does not include a divorced daughter.

The bench said that the family court rightly observed that the woman had already received her share from the estate of her father earlier and that having received the same, she could not again raise any claim of maintenance afresh from her brother and mother.

“The respondent No. 2/mother has already made arrangements for providing the residence to the appellant. It cannot be overlooked that the respondents being the brother and mother had also supported the daughter/appellant by voluntarily giving her Rs.45,000/- per month to her till 2014,” the court said.