NEW DELHI: Delhi High Court has held that a Hindu woman without any income has rights to enjoy the self-acquired property of a dead husband during her lifetime.
However, she doesn’t have absolute rights to sell or transfer the property when there are competing claims by other legal heirs, including children, clarified the court in a recent order.
The court was hearing a matter where the husband (who died before the wife) made a detailed Will giving right to his wife to enjoy the property till her death and further laid down how the asset will devolve.
“In the case of Hindu women, who may not have their own income, receiving a life estate given to them by their husbands – who may predecease them – is an essential safeguard for their financial security during their lifetime. Such security is essential to ensure that the woman is not dependent on her children, after the demise of the husband. Under such circumstances, the wife has complete rights to enjoy the property during her lifetime. She can also enjoy the income from the said property throughout her life. However, it cannot be held that the entire property should be construed as maintenance giving the wife absolute rights over the property, after the death of her husband,” noted Justice Prathiba M Singh.
The court was hearing a case stemming from a property dispute where the civil court concluded that since there was a Will by the husband before his death, the wife became absolute owner of his property since she lived there for 23 years.
But the verdict was challenged with multiple claims over the property by the dead man’s six children and a granddaughter. One party sought rights over the property as envisaged in the Will by the dead man while the other side argued that since mother had absolute ownership, fresh partition of property must devolve from that.
“The Will categorically states that the wife has no right to sell, alienate, or transfer the subject property. Given this position, to assert that upon the death of her husband she became the absolute owner of the subject property and could have sold or alienated the property would contradict the clear intent expressed in the Will as also the intention of the deceased mother clearly expressed through her conduct that she did not execute a Will or sell the property during her lifetime,” the court observed.
The court underlined that the wife did not ‘possess’ any rights in the property prior to her husband’s death and acquired them solely under the Will.
However, she doesn’t have absolute rights to sell or transfer the property when there are competing claims by other legal heirs, including children, clarified the court in a recent order.
The court was hearing a matter where the husband (who died before the wife) made a detailed Will giving right to his wife to enjoy the property till her death and further laid down how the asset will devolve.
“In the case of Hindu women, who may not have their own income, receiving a life estate given to them by their husbands – who may predecease them – is an essential safeguard for their financial security during their lifetime. Such security is essential to ensure that the woman is not dependent on her children, after the demise of the husband. Under such circumstances, the wife has complete rights to enjoy the property during her lifetime. She can also enjoy the income from the said property throughout her life. However, it cannot be held that the entire property should be construed as maintenance giving the wife absolute rights over the property, after the death of her husband,” noted Justice Prathiba M Singh.
The court was hearing a case stemming from a property dispute where the civil court concluded that since there was a Will by the husband before his death, the wife became absolute owner of his property since she lived there for 23 years.
But the verdict was challenged with multiple claims over the property by the dead man’s six children and a granddaughter. One party sought rights over the property as envisaged in the Will by the dead man while the other side argued that since mother had absolute ownership, fresh partition of property must devolve from that.
“The Will categorically states that the wife has no right to sell, alienate, or transfer the subject property. Given this position, to assert that upon the death of her husband she became the absolute owner of the subject property and could have sold or alienated the property would contradict the clear intent expressed in the Will as also the intention of the deceased mother clearly expressed through her conduct that she did not execute a Will or sell the property during her lifetime,” the court observed.
Expand
