DISQUALIFICATION OF SUCCESSION UNDER HINDU LAW

By JusCorpus Blogs February 25, 2024

INTRODUCTION

The laws that regulate inheritance such as intestate succession or testamentary succession in a country like India are not uniform^[1]. The laws project the multiplicity nature of the succession laws. This nature is due to the variety of religions, tribes, communities, and sects etc., These laws have their formation from the basis of personal laws of different religions and customs, and these were also given judicial recognition. One such act governing succession laws is The Hindu Succession Act, of 1956^[2], which governs the aspects related to succession, inheritance, whether it could be for the succession of a joint Hindu family property, a self-owned property, or an ancestral property, etc., comes within the scope of this Act. One such area of concern within the Act is who wouldn’t be entitled to inherit the properties. This would remain the concern of the context, and all its effects for why and why it has been made distinct would also be made possible.

The text of Manu^[3] says, ‘it is the sons, the nearest sapinda who first take on the property, the inheritance next belongs, is the basic crust towards the foundation of the inheritance laws’^[4]. Before the codified structure of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[5] was enacted to determine the order in which succession and inheritance would be governed largely by the different schools of Hindu Law that is the Mitakshara system being propinquity (close kinship) and the Dayabhaga system which was based on religious efficacy majorly. Some other systems could also be used to determine order such as the matriarchate was seen among Hindus in some parts of the country^[6].

Under classical law, the primary heirs are the male members of a family. However, different rules governed the different regions for different circumstances and situations. The law of the ancient land was only changed a little by the codified law and was not entirely made unlawful. To consider, The Hindu Succession draws its foundation from the Mitakshara system, that is the propinquity^[7]. It contains different rules for the succession of properties being male and female intestate, the distinction in law for, ancestral (coparcenary) and self-acquired property, the preference of agnates over cognates, the degrees of lineal descendants, etc., The last part of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[8], deals with the disqualifications, the section concerned would range from Section 25 to 28 of The Act.

SUCCESSION LAWS AND THEIR RISE INTO REGULATION

The Hindu Law of its earlier stage was of the aspect that the endowment rights of a person are not absolute. Physical defects, mental infirmities, diseases, and conduct were some of the disqualifications under that law in governance^[9]. When some of these disqualifications were of concern, the closeness or the nearness of the relationship was not a concern. The exclusion from the inheritance was based on religious grounds, but it could also be affected by social and moral grounds as defects. Religious grounds would be that the inability to perform the religious rites would not form the basis of disqualification.

In the words of Yajnavalkya^[10], ‘an impotent person, an outcaste and his issue, one lame, a madman, an idiot, a blind man and a person afflicted with an incurable disease, are persons not entitled to a share and are to be maintained’. As Vijananeswara said that ‘the above-listed persons must be allowed for food and raiment (clothing) only’. Manu^[11] said, ‘Impotent persons and outcastes, persons born blind and deaf, the insane, idiot and the dumb, as well as those deficient in any organ (action or sensation), receive no share’.

These disqualifications also had continuity on to the codified legislations. In the form of disqualifications according to the Hindu Succession Act, of 1956^[12]. This law was enacted to codify the law in succession among Hindus. Its applicability extends to Hindus only. The disqualified beings under the Hindu Succession Act, of 1956^[13] were murderers, descendants of a person who had converted to any other faith and disease, and any person with a deformity would not be disqualified.

DISQUALIFICATIONS UNDER THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956^[14]

The disqualifications under the Hindu Succession Act, of 1956 were three-fold,

REMARRIAGE OF A WIDOW

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[15] allows succession on the property in two ways, one they must be related by blood or adoption, and the other is that they should be related by being brought into the family by marriage^[16]. For example, if a male belonging to the family, gets married to another female, in this way she is introduced into the succession order of the family property.

Section 24 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[17], stated that the surviving wife of the deceased or the surviving wife of anyone intestate, such as the surviving wife of the predeceased son, or the predeceased brother wouldn’t be entitled to get a share from the intestate property if she has married again at the date when succession opens. The concept evolving over this was that, once the person remarries, she would be considered to be part of the family in which she would be married and she would be entitled to the property of that family, and not into the family where she previously belonged to. But if the remarriage was during the time that the girl’s husband hadn’t been deceased, then the remarriage would be considered void, and she would still be part of the family as the marriage is void^[18]. The status of the widow as of the date of opening for succession was the relevant thing which was concerned. However, by The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, of 2005^[19], this section was deleted but the criteria remained to be unchanged.

The case of Baliram Atmaram Dhake v Rahubai^[20] illustrated the same, that was a family of the husband, his father, and his brother. On the death of husband, the widow had inherited one-third of the share that belonged to her husband. She then remarried, and when the husband’s father deceased, claimed ½ of his share, the High Court of Bombay held that she wasn’t eligible for the share of the former father-in-law, as according to Section 24 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[21] she ceased to be a member of that family.

MURDERER

According to Section 25 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[22], a person who is guilty of or remained an accomplice in murder or of the person intestate or any person whose death would accelerate the succession in the favour of the murderer, cannot inherit. This was based on the principle that ‘Nemo ex suo delicto meliorem suam conditionem facere potest^[23]’, meaning ‘No one can make better of his misdeed”, and this was based on public policy.

In the case of Janak Rani Chadha v State of NCT of Delhi^[24], the husband murdered his wife, under normal circumstances, the husband can inherit the property of the dead wife, but by the application of Section 25 of The Act^[25], the husband was disqualified from inheriting the flat which belonged to the deceased wife.

In the pretext of the word murder, the meaning of being responsible for death would not be included^[26]. For example, a person would be responsible for the death of his/her father, causing him to die by impairing the family reputation, where he dies by suicide, the person would not be held liable for murder.

CONVERSION TO OTHER RELIGION: CONVERTS’ CHILDREN

Section 26 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[27], states according to this Act, any person, who converted to another faith can’t inherit the intestate’s property. This was followed strictly until the Caste Disabilities (Removal) Act, of 1850^[28], this legislation protests the converts to inherit from the intestate, but this was not extended further, that is to his/her descendants^[29]. For example, the son of a Hindu who had converted to the Muslim faith married a girl from the Muslim faith. In this case, the convert would be able to inherit from the intestate, but their Muslim son would not be able to do the same. In this, he had married a Hindu, and their son was raised as a Hindu, he would be entitled to inherit from the intestate.

EFFECTS BY DISQUALIFICATION

According to Section 27 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[30], any person who had been disqualified would be declared to be dead, and the inheritance would resume from the next person eligible as the heir in line. But, when the disqualification is due to murder, the rule being under public policy, the disqualified and also his representatives will be barred from inheriting. In the case of Vellikannu v R Singaperumal^[31], it is held that as the son is guilty of his father’s death, neither his wife nor son would be entitled to inherit the same.

Section 28 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[32], dealt with the that a diseased person with any defect or deformity would not be disqualified, as it was followed during the era of classical law, in particular, the Dayabhaga law. Several other grounds were also removed as a result of The Hindu Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act,1928^[33]

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

On par with the principle of equality, the disqualifications can be based upon only the above-stated grounds as according to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956^[34], under Hindu law, no other ground can be taken for disqualification. Some of the suggestions that can be drawn to be included in disqualification can include, unchaste women, people who commit rape and other equivalent tortures, and the person who has attempted to murder also.

Author(s) Name: Magizhini M (The Tamilnadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, School Of Excellence in Law)

Reference(s):

[1] Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Family Law Lectures: Family Law II (3rd ed, LexisNexis, 2011) 3

[2] Legislative Department<https://lddashboard.legislative.gov.in/actsofparliamentfromtheyear/hindu-succession-act-1956> accessed on 24 January 2024

[3] Mayne, Hindu Law and Usage (17^th ed, Bharat Law House, 2014)

[4] Adit Narayan Singh v Mahabir Prasad Tiwari, (1921) 23 Bom LR 692

[5] Legislative Department<https://lddashboard.legislative.gov.in/actsofparliamentfromtheyear/hindu-succession-act-1956> accessed on 24 January 2024

[6] Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Family Law Lectures: Family Law II (3rd ed, LexisNexis, 2011) 13

[7] Ibid

[8] Legislative Department<https://lddashboard.legislative.gov.in/actsofparliamentfromtheyear/hindu-succession-act-1956> accessed on 24 January 2024

[9] Paras Diwan, Family Law (11th ed, Allahabad Law Agency, 2018) 487

[10] Akshay Koundal, ‘Legal Provisions Regarding Exclusion from Inheritance under Old Hindu Law’ (Share Your Essays) < https://www.shareyouressays.com/knowledge/legal-provisions-regarding-exclusion-from-inheritance-under-old-hindu-law/117776> accessed on 19 January 2024