Download Free PDF View PDF
An Act to amend and codify the law relating to intestate succession among Hindus Be it enacted by Parliament in the Seventh Year of the Republic of India as follows:-CHAPTER I: PRELIMINARY 1. Short title and extent (1) This Act may be called the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. 2. Application of Act (1) This Act applies-(a) to any person, who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj; (b) to any person who is Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion; and (c) to any other person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion unless it is proved that any such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Act had not been passed. Explanation : The following persons are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion, as the case may be:-(a) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion; (b) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is a Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh by religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to which such parent belongs or belonged; (c) any person who is a convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh religion. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of clause (25) of article 366 of the Constitution unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, otherwise directs. (3) The expression "Hindu" in any portion of this Act shall be construed as if it included a person who, though not a Hindu by religion, is, nevertheless, a person to whom this Act applies by virtue of the provisions contained in this section.
Download Free PDF View PDF
Download Free PDF View PDF
When we think of the Hindu religion, it is difficult, if not impossible, to define Hindu religion or even adequately describe it. Unlike other religions in the world, the Hindu religion does not claim any one prophet; it does not worship any one god; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow any one set of religious rights or performances; in fact, it does not appear to satisfy the traditional features of any religion or creed. It may broadly be describe as a way of life and nothing. It is a museum of belief, a medley of rites, or a mere map, a geographical expression? A recent judicial exposition-case of the term ‘Hindu’ by the Kerala High Court, to the effect that only those persons who believe in idol worship are Hindus, leaves the impression by implication that those not believing in idol worship are outside the fold of Hinduism. In contrast to this judicial pronouncement, political statements of certain national leaders tend to expand the scope of the term ‘Hindu’ when they say that all Indians including Muslims, Christians, Jews and Parsis are Hindus. In the wake of these developments, a close look at the existing legal literature on the subject seems to be an interesting study. This paper therefore envisages a cursory but analytical and critical study of the subject in the light of juristic textual, judicial and legislative materials.
Download Free PDF View PDF
As noted earlier, neither Mahadu/his legal representatives nor Sonabai/her legal representatives classify as heirs in either Class-I or Class-II of the Schedule to the said Act. Therefore, there was no question of Mahadu/his legal representatives claiming any priority over the claim of Sonabai/her legal representatives. In fact, both claim as agnates and the First Appeal Court was entirely justified in decreeing the suit for partition upon the said basis. 23] Mr. Mankapure, faced with this position, faintly urged that Sonabai did not qualify as 'agnate' within the meaning assigned to this term under Section 3(1)(a) of the said Act, since according to him, Sonabai was not related to her husband Shivba 'by blood'. This contention, however, is no longer res integra. The Division Bench of this Court, in case of Nanasaheb Devre (supra), has precisely considered and rejected such contention. 24] The Division Bench of this Court in case of Nanasaheb Devre (supra), has held that the provisions of said Act were meant to codify the law relating to intestate succession among the Hindus and to achieve uniformity and certainty about various otherwise nebulous and shifting matters. This objective has, however, to be understood against the backdrop of existing interpreting system of personal law. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to begin with any legislative premise that the term related "by blood" has been introduced in any narrow sense. Rather, effort will have to be made to reach its applicative connotation. By reference to several precedents and principles, the Division Bench has held that conceptually, the Hindu marriage, as far as the wife is concerned, clearly brings out consanguine results, the wife merging and sharing the particles of the body of her husband and as such that of their common ancestor. Such kinship or consanguinity conceptually as well as physically cannot be less than of the blood relationship. Marriage is not only social but religious fact to a Hindu. It distinctively brings about union of two persons involving acceptance of a female into the family of the male spouse. Relation that ensues, is not restricted to male that marries but to the entire family of the male. Married wife in a family, thus becomes related to it wholly through her male spouse. The definition of the word "related" shows that to be related, persons could be treated as related to each other only if they belong to lawful or legitimate kinship. The definition makes reference to "kinship". The accepted modes by which such kinship results are clearly implied. Kinship is blood relationship. In social unit like family, marriage is an apparent mode of forging such relation. As far as the definition of "agnate" is concerned, the statute contemplates that this relationship should arise firstly, "by blood or adoption", and secondly, wholly through males. The words employed by the defining clauses having reference to blood will have to be understood and interpreted so as to further the obvious object of the Act and as far as possible to provide uniform system of succession. Law is not merely a biological text tracing decent and ascent. It is a sociological sanction in favour of those who can claim succession to the deceased. Sociology and history of given law often speak through the legislated words. The choice of the words "by blood" in the definition along with the word "adoption" is clearly intended to recognise all social modes resulting in the legitimate relationship. The words "by blood" cannot be read as "by birth" so as to restrict them to genetical incidence of family, for legislature, had it intended, would have surely spoken in that way. 25] The Division Bench of this Court at paragraph '17' has observed thus: What then is the meaning of the word blood ? Does it signify only the vital fluid that sustains the life or is it also
Download Free PDF View PDF
Religion is certainly a matter of faith with individuals or communities and it is not necessarily theistic. A religion may not only lay down a code of ethical rules for its followers to accept, it might prescribe rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are regarded as integral parts of religion. The meaning and scope of the word "Hindu" occurring in Hindu Religious legislations about its meaning or what is meant by the term "Hindu" occurring in the different legislations. In a judicial exposition in the M. Muraleedharan Nair case of the term ‘Hindu’ by the Kerala High Court, to the effect that only those persons who believe in idol worship are Hindus, leaves the impression by implication that those not believing in idol worship are outside the fold of Hinduism. In contrast to this judicial pronouncement, political statements of certain nationalist leaders tend to expand the scope of the term ‘Hindu’ when they say that all Indians including Muslims, Christians, Jews and Parsis are also Hindus. In the wake of these developments, a close look at the existing legal literature on the subject seems to be an interesting study. This paper therefore envisages a cursory but analytical and critical study of the subject in the light of juristic textual, judicial and legislative materials.
Download Free PDF View PDF
BRICS Law Journal
One of the most implicit foundations of a person’s identity today, in a cultural, national as well as global context, is the collegial relationship which he or she shares with another person, that relationship ultimately giving formation to a conjoint, consolidated and co-dependent recognition of the two as one under the law, particularly with respect to resolving socio-familial issues such as those of parentship, guardianship, adoption, succession and inheritance, among others. The term “relationship” mentioned above is connotative of marriage and the following paper attempts to look at this relationship, in its connection to the various facets of one’s personal identity as a citizen, from the perspective of a third gender Hindu Indian national. Though the right to marry of such an individual, especially as seen against the backdrop of the existing communal ethos in the country, may be accepted as being some form of a heterodoxy, it still falls short of qualifying as anything that .
Download Free PDF View PDF
Contemporary Law & Policy Review
In matters of a Hindu joint family, its joint property and partition, intestate and testamentary succession, Hindus are governed by either of the two major schools of Hindu law, Mitakshara and Dayabhaga. The former school is the most widely followed amongst Hindus, who form the largest part of the population of India. Areas other than intestate and testamentary succession are still uncodified, and hence,
Download Free PDF View PDF
