LawLoveLegal

Introduction Reinforcing the settled legal position that nomination does not override succession , the Orissa High Court has ruled that a legally wedded wife, being a Class-I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 , has a superior right over her deceased husband’s estate, irrespective of any nomination made in favour of other family members with banks or insurance companies. The judgment underscores that banking and insurance nominations are merely facilitative arrangements and do not constitute a separate or superior mode of inheritance. Factual Background of the Case The case arose from a dispute concerning the terminal benefits of Subhransu Mohanty , an employee of Canara Bank , who died on 18 September 2023 . At the time of his death: He was married to Snigdha Patnaik (married in 2014) The couple had a daughter Divorce proceedings initiated by Mohanty were still pending No decree of divorce had been passed, and the marriage subsisted in law Upon his death, the bank assessed h...

Background of the Case The Karnataka High Court has urged the Union Government to review the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 , as modified by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. The Court observed that while the amendment rightly strengthened the inheritance rights of daughters in coparcenary property, it has inadvertently created ambiguity regarding the inheritance position of widows and mothers , who were previously explicitly protected under the unamended provision. The decision was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justice R. Devdas and Justice B. Muralidhara Pai . Issue Highlighted by the High Court The Court noted that: The unamended Section 6 expressly recognised widows and mothers at the stage of a notional partition . Their entitlement to a share in ancestral property was clearly protected. However, the amended Section 6 (post-2005) gives equal coparcenary rights to daughters, but does not explicitly refer to: • widows • mothers • widows of...

Introduction: A Significant Advisory from the Supreme Court The Supreme Court of India has issued an important advisory urging all Hindu women to execute wills for their self-acquired and other properties to prevent family disputes and unintended devolution of assets. This observation came while the Court refused to strike down Section 15(1)(b) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which prioritises the heirs of a deceased woman's husband over her own parents when she dies intestate and without surviving spouse or children. The bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan emphasized that increasing litigation and emotional distress arising from succession disputes make it necessary for women to secure their property rights through testamentary planning. Background: The Controversy Around Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act Section 15(1)(b) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 provides the order of succession for property owned by a Hindu woman dying intestate. The statutory s...

In a landmark judgment reinforcing women’s property rights under Hindu law , the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled that any property received by a Hindu widow , either in partition or in lieu of maintenance , shall be treated as her absolute property , not as a limited estate . Justice Rohit W. Joshi , delivering the verdict, emphasized that a Hindu woman’s right to maintenance is a substantive legal entitlement — not “an empty formality or an act of grace,” but a tangible right against property . Case Background: The Bhamburkar Family Dispute The case stems from a decades-old property dispute within the Bhamburkar family of Nagpur . In 1928 , one Balaji Bhamburkar purchased several properties and built a house in 1931 . After his death in 1932 , his estate was divided among his three sons — Harihar, Keshao, and Krushna — and his widow, Laxmibai , through a deed executed on October 26, 1953 . Under this deed, the disputed house was allotted to Laxmibai . Laxmi...