Hindu Succession Act Doesn't Disqualify Widows From Inheriting Deceased Husband's Property After Remarriage: Madras High Court

The bench of Justice R Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan noted that though the Hindu Remarriage Act, 1856 disqualified a widow from inheriting properties upon remarriage, this Act was repealed after the Hindu Succession Act came into effect. The bench further noted that as per the Hindu Succession Act, only the widow of a pre-deceased son or widow of a predeceased son of the predeceased son or widow of the brother was disqualified upon remarriage. However, by way of the 2005 amendment, even this provision was repealed.

“The Hindu Succession Act,1956 does not contain a provision, which disqualifies widows from inheriting their husband's properties or disqualifying the widows from taking a share in the husband's property upon remarriage….A close reading of the above provision would show that only widows of a pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased son of a pre-deceased son or widow of a brother, would face a disqualification upon remarriage. Even that provision has now been repealed by the Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 39 of 2005,” the court observed.

The court was hearing an appeal against the order of the Additional District Judge refusing share in the deceased husband's property to his widow who had later remarried the deceased husband's brother. The original suit was filed by another brother of the husband claiming equal share in the property.

The suit properties originally belonged to one Chinna Gounder who had settled the property in favour of his 3 sons – Sevi Gounder, Chinnapaiya Gounder and Chinna Gounder. Sevi Gounder died leaving behind the original plaintiff and the defendant. The appellant's husband was the pre-deceased son of Sevi Gounder.

The defendant (original plaintiff) contended that the Hindu Widow's Remarriage Act will apply in the present case as Sevi Gounder's father, who had originally settled the property died much before the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act.

The court, however, noted that as per the settlement, the properties were to be taken by the male issues of the settles. Thus, after execution of the settlement, as and when the male issues were born to the settles, they became vested remaindermen and if any male issues die prior to the life estate holder, they die possessed of the vested remainder. The court added that such vested remainder would, upon the death of the remainderman, devolve on his heirs.

The court noted that the appellant's husband died in 1968, after the Hindu Succession Act came into effect and thus, upon his death, the wife and his two brothers would take the property at 1/3^rd each. The court thus held that the trial court was not right in its conclusion and ordered accordingly.

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. R. Nalliyappan

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. R. Munusamy

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 482

Case Title: Malliga (Died) and Others v. S Shanmugam (Died) and Others

Case No: A.S.No.696 of 2017