National University of Study and Research in Law

Ranchi

FAMILY LAW PROJECT

SUCCESSION RIGHTS OF HINDU AND MUSLIM WOMEN –

A COMPARATIVE STUDY

SYNOPSIS AND RESEARCH PROJECT

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

DR. SANGITA LAHA HRITVIK PRIYA

DEAN OF FACULTY SEMESTER- IV’B

NUSRL, RANCHI ROLL NO. : 1168

1|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
S NO. TOPIC PAGE NO.

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 3

2. INTRODUCTION 4

3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 5

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 6

5. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 7

6. TENTATIVE CHAPTERISATION 8

7. HINDU WOMEN AND 9-10

SUCCESSION RIGHTS – A
BRIEF HISTORY

8. CHANGES IN HINDU WOMEN’S 11-12

SUCCESSION RIGHTS – HINDU
SUCCESSION ACT, 1956

9. WOMEN’S SUCCESSION 13-15

RIGHTS AND HINDU
SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT)
ACT, 2005

10. MUSLIM WOMEN AND THEIR 16-17

SUCCESSION RIGHTS IN INDIA

11. HINDU AND MUSLIM 18-19

WOMEN’S SUCCESSION
RIGHTS: A COMPARISON

12. CONCLUSION 20

13. REFERENCES 21

2|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, Hritvik Priya, would like to thank all of those who helped me during the whole procedure
of making this project and helped me in completing it successfully.

Firstly, I would like to thank my teacher and mentor Dr. Sangeeta Laha Mam who showed
faith in me by providing such a wonderful topic. Her constant guidance has played a vital role
in completion of this project successfully. Her keen attention helped me to deal with each
problem that I faced during the making of this project. My heartfelt gratitude to all the staff
members and administrators of NUSRL for providing me with a wonderful library. Their
support cannot be expressed in words.

Finally, I would like to thank God for her benevolence and grace in enabling me to finish this
task. I express my heartfelt gratitude to all those who helped me to complete this project
without much problems.

Thanking you

Name - Hritvik Priya

Semester - IV ‘B’

Roll No. - 1168

3|Page
 SYNOPSIS

INTRODUCTION
Indian society is highly patriarchal and male dominated society. Men have always been
considered superior and have been preferred over Women by the Indian families. A birth of
son is celebrated with great pomp and joy in many Indian families even today while the same
people don’t celebrate the birth of a girl where the people worship Goddess Lakshmi
(goddess of wealth and prosperity and good fortune). Whether it comes to performing
important religious rites or other family functions, male members are considered first to
perform those functions. And this mentality has no religious barriers. Whether its Hindus or
Muslims, this gender disparity is very much visible and common in both the communities
who are the two of the largest communities of India. Girls are generally ill-treated as they are
considered to be ‘PARAYA DHAN’ since one day she will get married and go to her
husband’s house and become part of her husband’s family. Such mentality and stereotypes
had resulted in providing very less or no succession rights to a women in any type of property
in the Indian society and women were left entirely on the mercy of her father or husband and
his family. However with the change in time and various reforms, women rights to succeed
in her father’s and husband’s property was recognised and several legislations were passed to
provide the rights that were due for a long time to the women. The aim of this Research
Work, is to have a look at all those various legislations and case laws which have been
monumental in uplifting the status of women when it comes to Succession Rights in family’s
property belonging to Hindu and Muslim community and a comparison will be drawn to
show the similarity and differences in various succession rights available to Hindu women
and Muslim women in India.

4|Page
 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

1. To find out what are the legal right of succession available to Hindu and Muslim
Women in India
2. To find out what are the similarities and differences in Succession Rights of Hindu
and Muslim Women

5|Page
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The method of research for completion of this research paper is primarily based on secondary
sources of data. In addition to this various sources of primary data have also been employed.
The data from both the sources have been combined together in preparation of this research
paper. The researcher has also employed analytical method of research to critically analyse
the already available data from numerous sources and employ it in a meaningful way to
evaluate the material being of the research paper. He has likewise took help from outside
work area based research including on the web work area exploration to the degree that it
depends on law, related article, reports, working papers and related books and diaries have
been analysed extensively. Various material facts of the research has been collected from the
articles and data available on various online journals increasing the overall reliability of
Secondary source of Data. In addition to all this, review of the works of some of the previous
researchers has also helped the researcher a lot.

6|Page
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 MODERN HINDU LAW By Dr. Paras Diwan – The author in this book included
very minute detain relating to Succession in Hindu Law which has helped the
researcher a lot in understanding the various provisions of Succession in Hindu
Personal Laws. It contained detailed information about various legislations such as
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005 and also
included information from now invalidated Hindu Women Right to Property Act,
1937 which provided historical information about succession rights of Hindu Women
and also provided information about plight of Hindu women in ancient times.
 MODERN MUSLIM LAW By Dr. Paras Diwan - The author in this book included
very minute detain relating to Succession in Muslim Law which has helped the
researcher a lot in understanding the various provisions of Succession in Hindu
Personal Laws. It contained detailed information about various laws and rules
mentioned in Quran and other important sources of Muslim Law in India. It also
contained information regarding the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act,
1937 which provided further information about succession rights of Muslim Women
and also provided information about plight of Muslim Women in India when it comes
to Succession Rights.

7|Page
 TENTATIVE CHAPTERISATION

1. HINDU WOMEN AND SUCCESSION RIGHTS – A BRIEF HISTORY

2. CHANGES IN HINDU WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS – HINDU
SUCCESSION ACT, 1956
3. WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS AND HINDU SUCCESSION
(AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005
4. MUSLIM WOMEN AND THEIR SUCCESSION RIGHTS IN INDIA
5. HINDU AND MUSLIM WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS: A COMPARISON
6. CONCLUSION
7. REFERENCES.

8|Page
HINDU WOMEN AND SUCCESSION RIGHTS – A BRIEF HISTORY

Hinduism is one of the oldest religion of the world. Hinduism has its presence in India from
many centuries. Even today Hinduism is the dominant religion in India and Hindus represent
around 80% of the population of India. Being a highly organised society, the personal laws of
Hindus are very complex and is outcome of various changes throughout the centuries. These
complex issues of the Hindu Society were controlled by Dharma, the Vedas, and different
sources which were accepted to be both of heavenly beginning or were penned down by
Acharyas and Rishis who were knowledgeable in the study of religion and its different
complexities which were perceived as the law. It was unequivocally trusted that ethics and
morals when joined with wilful limitations and conditions were practical to manage the
general public.

Hindu women had been restricted to inherit property from time immemorial. The highly
patriarchal Hindu society never allowed the women to inherit any property in her father’s or
husband’s family. The reason given behind this system was that daughter have to get married
one day and leave her paternal home and his family for her husband’s family while the
reasoning given for not giving the wife succession rights in her husband’s property was that
women are not fit enough. Thus women being denied any legal rights to succeed the property.

In ancient India, the Hindus adhered to the Shastric or the traditional Hindu Law. These
Shastric Laws varied from region to region in India resulting in various communities who are
a part of Hinduism having their own personal laws which govern their lives making Hindu
laws more complex and uneven in different parts of the country. As a result, there were
different schools of Hindu law in India. Dayabhaga School is followed in Bengal, eastern
India, and in the bordering areas of Mayukha (Bombay), Konkan, and the western piece of
Gujarat. Marumakkattayam or Nambudri in Kerala additionally followed the Dayabhaga
School of Law. Mitakshara School is followed in other different parts of India, with slight
varieties.

The Dayabhaga School was in comparison very liberal to Mitakshara when it comes to giving
succession rights to the women. The Dayabhaga School gave coparcenary rights to daughters
along with sons and anyone senior most member of the family whether male or female can
acquire property after the death of the Karta while in Mitakshara School, only sons were

9|Page
given this privilege and they acquired a share in the property by the virtue of their birth. Also
in case of death of any coparcener, his rights were given to his/her legal heir i.e. wife, son,
daughter etc. in a Dayabhaga family while in Mitakshara Family, the shares of a dead
coparcener were distributed on the basis of doctrine of survivorship among other living
coparcener for example his son, brother etc. No rights were available to a Hindu Mitakshara
woman to inherit a property.

Such a miserable condition of Women when it comes to succession rights in Hindu society
was needing a drastic change and this paved the way for the Hindu Women’s Right to
Property Act 19371. This was the first legislation of its kind which dealt with rights of Hindu
widows, on the death of the husband, if he dies intestate. As per the provisions laid down in
Section 3 of the Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act 1937, a Hindu man's widow or
widows, widowed daughter-in-law, and widowed granddaughter-in-law were given a limited
right to inherit his estate under this Act, not only in lieu of, but also in addition to, his other
male coparceners. The share of the widow as per the Section 3(1)(8) 2 of the act was equal to
the share to that of a son. However since this right was limited in nature, the women got no
right to alienate the property by virtue of will, gift etc. or mortgage the property or give it to a
lease and neither she can claim partition of the property. Women only got the rights to enjoy
and possess the property which after her death will revert back to the other coparceners.
Women had full control only over her ‘STREEDHAN’ property. Streedhan included all
those moveable property which she received as a gift from his father, husband etc. during the
marriage ceremony.

1
THE HINDU WOMEN RIGHTS TO PROPERTY ACT, 1937. ACT NO. XVIII OF 1937 GOVT. OF INDIA
2
THE HINDU WOMEN RIGHTS TO PROPERTY ACT, 1937, § 3(1)(8)

10 | P a g e
CHANGES IN HINDU WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS – HINDU
SUCCESSION ACT, 1956

After the independence of India from Colonial rule of 200 years, the leaders of the country
took upon themselves the responsibility to bring about monumental changes in personal laws
of the Hindu society. As a result of this several changes were brought in laws of marriage,
divorce, maintenance etc. Apart from this, for the first time in history of India, the succession
laws of the Hindus were codified under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 3. Under this Act,
several provisions were laid down which were related to intestate and testamentary
succession of the property of the Hindus which also included Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.
Under the Section 6 of the HSA, 1956 when read along with Section 8 of the Act, widows
and mothers were given the share in the property of the deceased Hindu for the first time in
history. This was done on the basis of fact that wife and mothers were classified as Class I
heirs of the Schedule along with the son. Earlier after the death of a male coparcener, his
share use to be distributed among other coparcener by the virtue of Doctrine of Survivorship
and no share was given to the widow(s) or mother.

The HSA, 1956 also changed the status of the limited interest provided to the women in her
husband’s property through the 1937 Act. Section 14(1) of the HSA, 1956 4 stated that “Any
property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the
commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a
limited owner”.

The Section 14(2)5 also laid down a provision that “Nothing contained in sub-section (1)
shall apply to any property acquired by way of a gift or under a will or any other
Instrument or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award where the
terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a
restricted estate in such property”.

Basically Section 14 of the HSA, 1956 in its entirety provided for the first time the full
ownership of the property to which she was legally entitled to. She was not dependent upon
her father or husband or son to enjoy a property. This proved to be a game changing step in

3
THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 ACT No. 30 OF 1956 PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
4
THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, § 14(1)
5
THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, § 14(2)

11 | P a g e
the direction of Women empowerment in India. However the provisions were not immune to
contention from many men who had been enjoying the property rights up till the passing of
the HSA, 1956.

One Such case was that of V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddy, (1977) 3 SCC 99 6. In this case, a
widow was given a piece of land as a gift in lieu of maintenance from her in laws after the
death of the husband and a decree of such was obtained from the court. All these events
occurred before the 1956 Act. After the HSA, 1956 came into effect, the legal heirs of the
woman claimed full ownership of the property which she possessed which was contested by
the opposing party. The matter went to the local court were the court granted full ownership
to the widow which was challenged in High Court of Andhra Pradesh which gave the verdict
in favour of the appealing party on the basis of the decree which stated that she had only
limited ownership. However when the matter went to the Supreme Court, the court said

“A Hindu female's right to maintenance is not an empty formality or an illusory claim

but is a tangible right against property which flows from the spiritual relationship
between the husband and wife.”

Since the lady had got the property in lieu of maintenance, she had an intangible right in that
property and it can’t be taken back on the basis of a decree and hence the property was given
to the legal heirs of the widow to whom property was given.

WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS AND HINDU SUCCESSION

(AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005

6
V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddy, (1977) 3 SCC 99

12 | P a g e
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was a landmark act of legislation which provided women for the
first time a legal right to succeed in property and granted full ownership to the women.
However it was still lagging behind when it comes to providing coparcenary rights to Women
in a Joint Family Property. Under the HSA, 1956, daughters were not given the coparcenary
rights in a joint family property which the son enjoyed. The daughters were deprived of the
coparcenary rights owing to the fact that Daughters are to be married one day and have to
leave the paternal home. In order to keep the possession of the property within the family,
daughters were not given the Coparcenary rights since if she was given the right, the title of
the property will go to other family.

This discrimination between Sons and Daughters was finally removed in the Hindu
Succession (Amendment) Act, 20057. Under this Act, amendment was made to Section 6 of
8
the HSA, 1956 which finally gave the coparcenary rights by virtue of her birth to the
daughters in ancestral property of a Hindu Undivided Family belonging to Mitakshara School
in the same manner as it was given to the sons and the daughters were subject to same level
of liabilities in respect to the said coparcenary property to that of the sons.

Also the 2005 Amendment made provision that the property shall not devolve by the virtue of
Doctrine of Survivorship but by testamentary or intestate succession as the case may be under
this act and daughter are allotted the same share as to that of son and in case the daughter pre
deceases the deceased, her share shall be devolved to her son or daughter or both if the case
requires. It also gave the right to the daughters to demand partition and alienate her property.

However Sub Section 5 of the Section 6 of the Amendment Act of 2005 laid down a
provision that if a partition has taken place before 20 th December 2004, the said amendment
will not apply to that partition and daughter cannot claim her coparcenary right in the
property creating 2 different classes of daughters in which one where coparceners while the
others were not coparceners.

The Amendment also stated that only living daughters of a father who were alive on the date
of commencement of the Act can claim coparcenary right in the ancestral property. If the
father was not alive on the date of commencement of the Act, daughter cannot claim her
share in the property and no remedy was available to as such. This was further upheld by the
Supreme Court in the case of Prakash v. Phulavati, (2016) 2 SCC 36 9. In this case, the
7
HINDU SUCCESSION (Amendment) ACT, 2005 ACT No. 39 of 2005 PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
8
THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, § 6
9
Prakash v. Phulavati, (2016) 2 SCC 36

13 | P a g e
property was received by Phulavati, the daughter, from her deceased father, who had acquired
it from his adoptive mother. In this case, the appellant argued that the respondent only had a
right to the father's self-acquired property. However, the 2005 Amendment was introduced at
this time, and the respondent now claimed a share under the amendment. However, the
Supreme Court rejected the argument of the daughter and ruled that "only live daughters of
living fathers could become coparceners," and that if the father died before the Hindu
Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, there would be no remedy. As a result, the Act
could not have any retroactive effect, and the property of a pre-deceased father would
devolve according to the laws of survivorship. As a result, a daughter whose father died
before the Act's effective date could only inherit his self-acquired property, not coparcenary
property.

The Supreme Court gave a very contradictory judgement in the case of Danamma v. Amar,
(2018) 3 SCC 34310 with respect to the judgement given in the Phulavati case. In this case, in
2001, a man died, leaving a wife, two sons, and two daughters behind. The deceased
grandfather's grandson sought partition after his death. They denied the two daughters any
portion, saying that they were born before the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 was passed. The
claim was upheld by both the trial court and the High Court, despite the fact that the 2005
Amendment had already passed at the time.

“If the case had been pending before the 2005 Amendment Act, daughters may be
treated as coparceners and given a stake in coparcenary property”, the Supreme Court
said on hearing the appeal of the case. Furthermore, court also stated the daughter's birth date
was irrelevant; the only need was that she should be alive on the date the partition takes
place. Thus giving coparcenary rights to the daughters of the father who were already dead
before the commencement of the 2005 Amendment Act.

Finally in the case of Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1 11 the confusion
regarding the coparcenary rights available to daughters was cleared by the Supreme Court. In
this case, the Supreme Court overruled Phulavati and partially overruled Danamma
judjement, holding that the right to coparcenary is conferred by birth. As a result, a daughter's
birthdate is irrelevant in this case. It further specified that the father did not have to be alive
when the 2005 Amendment Act took effect. It was decided that the Act would apply
retroactively. That is, even if the father died before 2005, the daughters will be allocated a
10
Danamma v. Amar, (2018) 3 SCC 343
11
Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, (2020) 9 SCC 1

14 | P a g e
share of the coparcenary estate. The Supreme Court emphasised the Act's purpose, which was
to eliminate gender discrimination in coparcenary rules. As a result, the purpose could only
be achieved if the Act was applied retroactively.

MUSLIM WOMEN AND THEIR SUCCESSION RIGHTS IN INDIA

15 | P a g e
Islam originated in modern day Saudi Arabia in the 7th Century AD and rapidly spread across
the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia. Many Muslims established empires across
these territories and started expanding their empire. Muhammad Ghori of Afghanistan
attracted by huge wealth of India invaded and was successful in establishing an empire
thereby setting the foot for the spread of Islam in India. Soon after Islam spread across India
through various empires and many centuries and become the second largest community in
India. Just like any other religion, Muslims too have their own personal laws and rules for the
succession which govern the lives of the people belonging to Muslim community. However
the personal law of the Muslims is peculiar in its own way. Firstly most of the Personal laws
of the muslims is derived directly from the ‘Quran’ which is the supreme source of law in
Islam. Apart from Quran, there are 3 other primary source of Muslim laws which are

(a) Sunna or Ahadis ( Traditions followed by Prophet Muhammad)

(b) Ijma ( Opinions and judgements of learned scholars and jurists)
(c) Qiyas (Analogical Deductions)

Apart from these mentioned sources of law, The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat)
Application Act, 193712 is also were Muslim Law is derived in India.

Before the advent of Islam in Arabia, women were deprived of any right in the property. This
was changed by Prophet Muhammad who brought many changes and reforms in lives of the
women. He removed the discrimination between men and women in terms of succession
rights and made both of them as heirs.

In Muslim law, there are 2 classes of heirs. The first class of heirs are called the sharers.
They are also known as Quranic heirs or dhawul-furud. The relatives who come under this
category are (1) Husband, (2) Wife, (3) Daughter, (4) Daughter of a son (or son's son or son's
son and so on), (5) Father, (6) Paternal Grandfather, (7) Mother, (8) Grandmother on the male
line, (9) Full sister (10) Consanguine sister (11) Uterine sister, and (12) Uterine brother.

The second class of heirs are called Residuaries. It includes all other relatives who are not
sharers. Sharers are the ones who are entitled to a certain share in the deceased’s
property and Residuaries would take up the share in the property that is left over after
the sharers have taken their part.

12
THE MUSLIM PERSONAL LAW (SHARIAT) APPLICATION ACT, 1937 ACT NO. 26 OF 1937 GOVT. OF INDIA

16 | P a g e
Muslim law does not create any distinction between Male and Females when it comes to
inheriting the property of the deceased. However, the quantum of share received by males
and females greatly vary. Women generally receive half the share of the property of the
Men in Muslim law. For example, a wife takes 1/4th of share in a case where the couple
has no lineal descendants, and a one-eighth share if lineal descendants are present.
While a husband (in the case of succession to the wife's estate) takes a half share in a
case where the couple is without lineal descendants, and a one-fourth share if lineal
descendants are present. A sole daughter takes a half share. Where the deceased has left
behind more than one daughter, all daughters jointly receive two-thirds of the share. If the
deceased left behind sons and daughters, the daughters cease to be sharer and instead
become residuary, with the residual allocated so that each son receives twice as much as
each daughter.

Widows in Muslim Law have been treated fairly well when it comes to inheritance
rights. The succession does not exclude any widow. After paying for the deceased
husband's funeral, legal charges, and debts, a childless Muslim widow is entitled to one-
fourth of his property. A widow with children or grandchildren, on the other hand, is
entitled to one-eighth of the deceased husband's estate. If a Muslim man marries while
sick and then dies from that disease without making a full recovery or consummating
the marriage, his widow has no right to inherit. However, if her ailing spouse divorces
her and then dies of that illness, the widow's right to an inheritance share endures until
she remarries.

In cases where a Muslim man dies leaving behind his pregnant wife, the child in the womb of
its mother is competent to inherit the property of the man irrespective of the gender of the
gender of the child provided that it is born alive. A child in the embryo is regarded as a living
person and, as such, the property vests immediately in that child.

17 | P a g e
HINDU AND MUSLIM WOMEN’S SUCCESSION RIGHTS: A
COMPARISON

Hindu and Muslim Personal Law are very distinct from each other when it comes to
Inheritance Rights in general. This distinction greatly increases when it comes to providing
Succession Rights to the Women.

Hindu Women after the 2005 Amendment Act can claim equal share in their father’s property
to that of her brothers while in Muslim Law if there are brothers present, the daughter ceases
to be a Sharer and becomes a Residual and receive only half the share of which her brother(s)
receive.
A Hindu Women receives full share in her deceased husband’s property if there are no lineal
descendants and no mother of the deceased alive. If mother is alive, the widow receives half
of the property while the mother receives the other half as Class I Heirs. Furthermore a Hindu
Widow generally receive equal share in her husband’s property with that to her son or
daughter if there are any son or daughter alive. While in Muslim Law, Widow receives only
1/4th of the property of her husband if there are no lineal descendants and 1/8 th of the property
if there are any alive lineal descendants of the couple. The rest of the property is distributed
among other Sharers.

Widows in Muslims have generally enjoyed greater powers are shares than their Hindu
Counterpart when it comes to Inheritance rights historically. Earlier Hindu Widows were not
entitled to receive any property of her deceased husband. The 1937 Act did provided limited
interest to the women but it was far off from the best possible situation for the Hindu
Widows. On the other hand, Muslim widows were never deprived of right to inherit her
husband’s property although not equally to that of her son it was still impressive considering
how miserable the condition of widows was in Hindus. However with the important changes
in Hindu laws post-independence, Hindu Widow’s finally received their due share and the
quantum of share was also more than that in case of Muslim Widows.

In Muslim Law, there is no provision for ancestral and separate property like Hindu Law.
Each and every property whether moveable or immovable which a person own can be
inherited by his/her legal heirs. The issue of inheritance of property in Muslim law arises only
after the death of the person who holds the property. There is no right established by birth in

18 | P a g e
Muslim Law like it is the case in Hindu Law. Also when it comes to Testamentary
Succession, a person can only dispose of 1/3 rd of his property by a way of Wasiyat or will.
Rest 2/3rd share has to go by rules of succession while in the case of Hindus, any person can
fully dispose his/her property through Testamentary Succession.

Lastly in Muslim Law, no Doctrine of Representation is followed like in the case of Hindu
Law. To understand this let us take an example where A who is a Muslim Man has a wife B
and 2 Sons C and D and have 2 grandsons E who is the son of C and F who is the son of D. In
this case, A dies and C has already predeceased A. Now when it comes to devolving the
property, D will receive his share in A’s property along with B. However C’s son E will be
excluded from receiving any share in his grandfather’s property since Doctrine of
Representation is not followed in Muslim Law. In Muslim law it is assumed that if a son has
pre deceased his father and has left behind any lineal descendant, the deceased is assumed to
be never existent and so his descendants are disqualified from receiving any property from
his/her grandparents.

19 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

Women in India have been subject to various forms of discrimination from time immemorial.
Whether it is society or the family, women have faced discrimination in every sphere of their
lives in India. Discrimination in terms of inheritance rights to Men and Women was not
untouched from this phenomenon. Whether it is Hindu or Muslim family, Males were
generally preferred and given more importance than that to females in terms of succeeding
the family owned property. However with the changes in Hindu laws, an effort was made to
get rid of this discrimination. The Judiciary played a very important role in bringing parity
among Males and Females inheritance rights especially in Hindu society which had no
succession rights to Women earlier. Judiciary was very active when it came to remove
ambiguity and discrimination in the newly drafted and enacted Hindu Laws of Succession.
Muslim Women considerably enjoyed better inheritance rights since the advent of Islam than
Hindu Women. However with passage of time the reforms in Hindu Laws brought better
situation for Hindu Women than that to a Muslim Women. In the current scenario this is an
urgent need to bring reform in Muslim Laws which are being followed from very long period
of time and has become outdated in the current scenario. The Muslim Women’s Rights of
Succession were very progressive when formulated first in 7 th Century AD but the strict
nature of Muslim law means that no changes have been brought in these laws since and
Shariat is still followed by the people. Though Hindus and Muslims are two distinct
communities the need for women empowerment and giving due rights to them is equally
needed since both communities have treated Women very badly in the past and the condition
needs to be improved even today in both the communities.

20 | P a g e
 REFERENCES

PRIMARY SOURCES

 HINDU WOMEN’S RIGHT TO PROPERTY ACT, 1937’

 HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956
 HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005
 MUSLIM PERSONAL LAW (SHARIAT) APPLICATION ACT, 1937

SECONDARY SOURCES

 Dr. Paras Diwan, Modern Hindu law, 23rd edition 2016, Allahabad law Agency ,
New Delhi
 Dr. Paras Diwan, Modern Muslim law, 23rd edition 2016, Allahabad law Agency ,
New Delhi
 Arya Mittal, Evolution of Hindu women’s right to property ( August 22, 2021)
iPleaders Blog, https://blog.ipleaders.in/evolution-of-hindu-womens-right-to-
property/
 Dr. SK Shireen, Principal Junior Civil Judge cum Judicial Magistrate of First Class,
Sompeta, Muslim Law of Inheritance

21 | P a g e