Succession to a Hindu female and stridhana - Family Law I - Hindu Law

← All Family Law I - Hindu Law topics Past papers

On this page

1. Stridhana in the traditional law
2. Section 14: limited estate becomes absolute
3. Section 15: order of succession
4. Section 16: rules of distribution
5. Problem
How this is examined

Cases checked to exist. Read the judgment before quoting a holding.

Every case cited here has been checked to exist — the citation resolves and names the right parties. The propositions attributed to each case have not been verified line by line against the judgment. Case names link through to the full judgment: read it before quoting a holding in an examination answer, and never carry a proposition from notes into court on trust.

Two separate questions. First, what does a Hindu woman own? Section 14 answers that: whatever she possesses, she owns absolutely, unless section 14(2) applies. Second, who takes it when she dies intestate? Sections 15 and 16 answer that, with a scheme different from the one for males. Keep the two apart in your answer.

1. Stridhana in the traditional law

Stridhana literally means “woman's property”. The Smritis listed six kinds: gifts made before the nuptial fire (adhyagni), gifts made during the bridal procession (adhyavahanika), gifts made through affection by the father-in-law or mother-in-law (pritidatta), and gifts made by the father, the mother and the brother. Vijnaneshwara, in the Mitakshara, gave the word a wider meaning, covering property a woman acquired by inheritance, purchase, partition, seizure or finding. The Privy Council later narrowed this, holding that property a woman inherited from a male or female was not her stridhana.

The practical division was between:

Stridhana proper, such as gifts from relatives (saudayika), over which she had full power of disposal, and which passed on her death to her own heirs under a special order that varied with the kind of stridhana and the form of her marriage; and
the woman's estate (limited estate), mainly property she inherited. She enjoyed the income but could alienate only for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate. On her death the property reverted to the heirs of the last male holder (reversioners), who could challenge her alienations.

2. Section 14: limited estate becomes absolute

Section 14(1) provides that any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of the Act, shall be held by her as full owner and not as a limited owner. The Explanation gives “property” a wide meaning: movable and immovable property acquired by inheritance or devise, at a partition, in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance, by gift from any person (relative or not) before, at or after marriage, by her own skill or exertion, by purchase or prescription, or in any other manner, and also any stridhana held by her immediately before the Act.

Section 14(2) is the exception. Sub-section (1) does not apply to property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument, or under a decree, order or award, where the terms of that gift, will, instrument, decree, order or award prescribe a restricted estate.

The two sub-sections were reconciled in V. Tulasamma v. Sesha Reddi, 1977 INSC 91, (1977) 3 SCC 99, AIR 1977 SC 1944. A widow had, by a compromise decree of 1949, been given property for her maintenance with only a life interest. The question was whether she became full owner in 1956. A three-Judge Bench held that she did:

Section 14(1) is to be construed liberally, to advance the object of ending the limited estate; section 14(2) is a proviso and must be read narrowly.
A Hindu widow's right to maintenance is a pre-existing right, a tangible right against the property of the family, not a mere moral claim.
Where property is given to her in recognition of such a pre-existing right, the instrument does not confer a new title; section 14(1) applies, and any restriction in the instrument is wiped out.
Section 14(2) applies only where the instrument confers on her a new right for the first time, with no prior claim in her favour.

Trap. “Possessed” does not mean actual physical possession. It is used in a broad sense and includes constructive possession, such as property let out to a tenant or held by an agent. But if the woman had parted with all interest before 1956, she does not “possess” it, and section 14(1) cannot enlarge what she no longer has.

3. Section 15: order of succession

Section 15(1) sets five groups. The property of a female Hindu dying intestate devolves:

(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband;
(b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband;
(c) thirdly, upon the mother and father;
(d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and
(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

Section 15(2) creates two special streams, based on the source of the property:

(a) property she inherited from her father or mother devolves, in the absence of any son or daughter (including children of a pre-deceased son or daughter), not upon the heirs in sub-section (1) but upon the heirs of the father;
(b) property she inherited from her husband or father-in-law devolves, in the same absence, upon the heirs of the husband.

The aim is to send inherited property back to the family it came from when the woman leaves no issue. The provision is read strictly. In Omprakash v. Radhacharan, 2009 INSC 671, (2009) 15 SCC 66, a young widow was turned out of her matrimonial home, lived with her parents, and acquired property by her own employment. She died childless. Her self-acquired property was not within section 15(2), so it went under section 15(1)(b) to her husband's heirs and not to her mother's side. The Court said that sentiment or sympathy cannot override the plain words.

4. Section 16: rules of distribution

Rule 1. Among the heirs in section 15(1), those in one entry take simultaneously, and an earlier entry is preferred to a later one.
Rule 2. The children of a pre-deceased son or daughter take between them the share their parent would have taken.
Rule 3. Where the property goes to the heirs of the father, mother or husband (section 15(1)(b), (d), (e) and 15(2)), it devolves in the same order and by the same rules as if it had been the father's, mother's or husband's, and that person had died intestate immediately after the woman.

5. Problem

A Hindu female dies intestate leaving one son, two daughters, her husband and her brother. Distribute her property.

Issue. Which of the claimants are heirs under section 15, and in what shares?

Law. Section 15(1)(a) places sons, daughters and the husband together in the first entry. Section 16 Rule 1 makes them take simultaneously and to the exclusion of later entries. A brother is not named in section 15(1) at all; he can take only as one of the “heirs of the father” under section 15(1)(d), which is reached only if there is no one in entries (a) to (c).

Assumption. The property is taken to be her own (self-acquired, gifted, or received at partition), not property she inherited from her parents or from her husband or father-in-law, which would bring section 15(2) into play. Note, however, that section 15(2) operates only “in the absence of any son or daughter”. Since she has left a son and daughters, section 15(2) would not be triggered even if the property were inherited, and the result below would be the same. Stating this shows the examiner you know the sub-section.

Application. The son, the two daughters and the husband are all in entry (a). There are four heirs in that entry, each taking an equal share. The brother is excluded because entry (a) is filled.

Conclusion. Son 1/4, each daughter 1/4, husband 1/4. The brother takes nothing.

How this is examined

The distribution problem above was set in January 2026 and is a stock question; answer it in the issue / law / application / conclusion form, with the section 15(2) point made explicitly. As an essay: “Discuss the property rights of a Hindu female under section 14” or “Explain the rules of succession to the property of a Hindu female dying intestate.” For section 14, cover the old limited estate, the text of 14(1) and its Explanation, 14(2), and Tulasamma in some detail. As a short note: stridhana, or section 15(2).