In a significant reinforcement of women’s inheritance rights under Hindu succession law, the Gujarat High Court—along with lower courts—has clarified that a woman’s decision to marry outside her caste cannot be used to strip her of her lawful share in either ancestral property or property self-acquired by her parents.
One case involved a Patel woman who married a man from an OBC community and was later cut off by her family. After her father passed away in 1986, her seven siblings had their names entered in the ancestral property records while omitting hers. She discovered this only in 2018 and filed a civil suit the following year, claiming her 1/8th share. The trial court dismissed the case on the ground that the 12-year limitation period had expired. Her siblings supported this position when she appealed the decision.
The High Court took a different view. Setting aside the trial court’s order, it observed that under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, a daughter’s coparcenary rights date back to 1956, despite the 2005 amendment that formally recognized daughters as coparceners. The court emphasized that a daughter’s right in her father’s property remains intact unless she voluntarily relinquishes it or it is extinguished through some legal process. The matter has been sent back to the civil court to examine the partition and other issues raised in her suit.
A separate case from Ahmedabad involved another woman who had eloped and married outside her caste. She sought to prevent her mother and brother from selling property her late father had purchased in the Ghatlodia area, filing suit in 2013. Her family countered that she had broken ties with them and that although she returned in 2008 and was given a Vejalpur flat to stay in, she wrongfully took possession of it. An FIR was lodged, and after their mother’s death, the brother filed a counterclaim asserting that he had bought the Vejalpur house from her in 2011.
In May 2022, the civil court barred the brother from selling the disputed properties, ruling that they were undivided coparcenary assets in which the sister held an equal stake. The court also dismissed the allegation that she had usurped the Vejalpur residence. The brother later challenged the order before a district court, but the challenge was unsuccessful.
Also Read: Gujarat High Court: Hindu Marriages In India Cannot Be Dissolved Abroad https://www.vibesofindia.com/gujarat-high-court-hindu-marriages-in-india-cannot-be-dissolved-abroad/
