STOCK MARKET BSE NSE

Heirs of father of woman can inherit property under Hindu Succession Act: Supreme Court

The apex court held that in the present case, Jagno, who as a widow of Sher Singh who had died in 1953, had succeeded to half share in the agricultural land.

Published: 25th February 2021 01:00 PM  |   Last Updated: 25th February 2021 01:00 PM   |  A+A-

Supreme Court

Supreme Court (Photo| Shekhar Yadav, EPS)

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said heirs of the father of a woman can inherit property under the Hindu Succession Act and they cannot be held as "strangers".

A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy referred to Section 15(1)(d) of the Hindu Succession Act and said the heirs of the parental side of a Hindu woman are covered under persons entitled to succession of property.

"A perusal of Section 15(1)(d) indicates that heirs of the father are covered in the heirs who could succeed. When heirs of the father of a female are included as person who can possibly succeed, it cannot be held that they are strangers and not the members of the family qua the female," the bench said.

Section 15(1)(d) of the Hindu Succession Act relates to general rules of succession in the case of female Hindus and says that property can be inherited upon the heirs of the father.

The top court said the term "family" has to be understood in a wider sense so as to include within its fold not only close relations or legal heirs but "even those persons who may have some sort of antecedent title, a semblance of a claim or even if they have a spes successionis".

The judgement came in a case related to the property inherited by a woman named Jagno.

She entered into a family settlement after death of her husband Sher Singh and settled the property in favour of her brothers' sons.

The descendents of the brother-in-law of Jagno challenged the transfer of the property.

The apex court held that in the present case, Jagno, who as a widow of Sher Singh who had died in 1953, had succeeded to half share in the agricultural land and she was the absolute owner when she entered into a settlement.

"We, thus, do not find any merit in the submission of counsel for the appellants that the defendants-respondents were strangers to the family. In view of our discussions, we do not find any merit in this appeal," the bench said.



Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp