Latest news with #IndianSuccessionAct
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Ancestral property rights for Adivasi women: Constitution's promise over customary law
On July 17, the Supreme Court affirmed that a woman from a tribal community has an equal right to her family's ancestral property. The Court struck down an order of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which in 2022, cited the absence of a specific customary law to deny inheritance rights to an appellant. Customary laws are generally unwritten conventions that govern the community affairs of tribal groups. Last week, however, the SC took a more expansive view of the rights of women from these communities and laid down that their exclusion from inheritance rights was discriminatory. Emphasising Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law, the SC pointed out that 'Customs too, like the law, cannot remain stuck in time'. They cannot be used to 'deprive others of their right,' the Court ruled. The case dates to 1992, when Dhaiya, a tribal woman in Chhattisgarh, sought the partition of her maternal grandmother's property and was denied multiple times — first by customary laws, and then by trial and appellate courts. The SC's order is a significant intervention in the debate on gender justice in tribal communities. This is not the first time that the apex court has taken a strong stand in favour of inheritance rights of women from tribal groups. In December 2022, while hearing a case of a tribal woman from Odisha who sought a share in the compensation awarded for the acquisition of land belonging to her ancestors, the SC said, 'When the daughter belonging to the non-tribal is entitled to the equal share in the property of the father, there is no reason to deny such right to the daughter of the tribal community. Female tribal is entitled to parity with male tribal in intestate succession…' The bench had then advised the Centre to 'look into the matter and if required, to amend the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act (HSA).' The Act does not apply to Scheduled Tribes. The Indian Succession Act, 1925, too, gives states the power to exclude the tribals. Section 20 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949, allows the woman to inherit her father's property if she marries a man and makes him a ghar-jamai (resident son-in-law). The marriage, however, has to happen during the lifetime of the father. Customary laws are important as a bulwark against forceful assimilation and homogenisation of tribal communities. At the same time, as the SC rightly pointed out in Dhaiya's case, 'collective ethos of the Constitution' ensures 'that there is no discrimination against women'.
News18
6 days ago
- News18
Denial Of Inheritance To Natural Heir In Will Requires Closer Scrutiny: SC
The SC said, unlike other documents, when a will is propounded, its maker is no longer in the land of the living, which casts a solemn duty on the court The Supreme Court said on Thursday that only when the propounder dispels the suspicious circumstances and satisfies the conscience of the court that the testator had duly executed the will out of his free volition without coercion or undue influence, would the will be accepted as a genuine one. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Joymalya Bagchi said, unlike other documents, when a will is propounded, its maker is no longer in the land of the living, which casts a solemn duty on the court to ascertain whether the will propounded had been duly proved. 'Onus lies on the propounder not only to prove due execution but dispel from the mind of the court, all suspicious circumstances which cast doubt on the free disposing mind of the testator," the bench said. The court pointed out a will has to be proved like any other document subject to the requirements of Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, that is examination of at least one of the attesting witnesses. The court dismissed an appeal filed by Gurdial Singh through his legal representatives and affirmed the findings of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The High Court had set aside the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court, and declared Jagir Kaur, wife of Maya Singh, as the owner and in possession of the suit land. The appellant was nephew of Maya Singh, who died in 1991. He claimed Maya Singh executed a will in 1991 bequeathing land, measuring 67 karnals and 4 marlas to him. The Trial Court decreed the suit and held him as the lawful owner of the land, finding the will as genuine. The First Appellate Court at Amritsar upheld the judgment and the decree passed in the appellant's suit. The High Court, however, reversed the concurrent findings, holding that the suspicious circumstance namely, non-mention of first respondent, who was the wife of the testator Maya Singh and the reasons for her disinheritance in the will exposed absence of 'free disposing mind' of the testator. Examining the appeal, the court held, a cumulative assessment of the attending circumstances including this unusual omission to mention the very existence of his wife in the will, gave rise to serious doubt that the will was executed as per the dictates of the appellant and is not the 'free will' of the testator. The bench said deprivation of a natural heir, by itself, may not amount to a suspicious circumstance because the whole idea behind execution of the will is to interfere with the normal line of succession. However, the court emphasised, the prudence requires reason for denying the benefit of inheritance to natural heirs and an absence of it, though not invalidating the will in all cases, shrouds the disposition with suspicion as it does not give inkling to the mind of the testator to enable the court to judge that the disposition was a voluntary act. The bench pointed out in Ram Piari Vs Bhagwant & Ors (1993) this court held when suspicious circumstance exists, courts should not be swayed by due execution of the will alone. When unusual features appear in a will or unnatural circumstances surround its execution, the court must undertake a close scrutiny and make an overall assessment of the unusual circumstances before accepting the will, the bench added. In the case, the bench said, 'We have no hesitation to hold that non-mention of first respondent or the reasons for her disinheritance in the will, is an eloquent reminder that the free disposition of the testator was vitiated by the undue influence of the appellant." Court noted Jagir Kaur unequivocally stated that she was living with her husband till his death and the specious rationale given that she may have been disinherited as Maya Singh's monies had been settled in her favour and she was entitled to pension is hardly convincing. It pointed out, no evidence was led to show whether the quantum of money said to be settled in favour of 1st respondent was reasonable and would satisfy the conscience of a man of ordinary prudence with regard to her complete expungement in the will. The bench further found the appellant's case was not only to propound the will in his favour but even to deny the very status of first respondent as Maya Singh's wife. 'When one reads the contents of the will, appellant's stand is stark and palpable in its tenor and purport. The will is a cryptic one where Maya Singh bequests his properties to his nephew i.e. the appellant, as the latter was taking care of him. However, the will is completely silent with regard to the existence of his own wife and natural heir, i.e. the first respondent, or the reason for her disinheritance," the bench said. Court further noted the evidence on record showed first respondent was residing with Maya Singh till the latter's death. Nothing had come on record to show the relation between the couple was bitter. As per the appellant, she was nominated by Maya Singh and was entitled to receive his pension which demonstrates the testator's conduct in accepting first respondent as his lawfully wedded wife. Court said, non-mention of the status of wife or the reason for her disinheritance in the will ought not to be examined in isolation but in the light of all attending circumstances of the case. Further, it held, the Trial Court erroneously observed that non-performance of last rites of Maya Singh by first respondent hinted at sour relations between the couple. 'Ordinarily, in a Hindu/Sikh family, last rites are performed by male sapinda relations. Given this practice, first respondent not performing last rites could not be treated as a contra indicator of indifferent relationship with her husband during the latter's lifetime. In this backdrop, it cannot be said Maya Singh had during his lifetime, denied his marriage with first respondent or admitted that their relation was strained, so as to prompt him to erase her very existence in the will. Such erasure of marital status is the tell-tale insignia of the propounder and not the testator himself," the bench said. About the Author Sanya Talwar Sanya Talwar, Editor at Lawbeat, has been heading the organisation since its inception. After practising in courts for over four years, she discovered her affinity for legal journalism. She has worked More Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : supreme court view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 18, 2025, 19:34 IST News india Denial Of Inheritance To Natural Heir In Will Requires Closer Scrutiny: SC Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Mint
15-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Navigating inheritance: Know the difference between succession certificate and legal heir certificate
Navigating inheritance in India often involves two critical documents: thesuccession certificate and thelegal heir certificate. Though both relate to a deceased person's estate, they serve distinct purposes, are issued by different authorities, and are applied in specific scenarios. Mistaking one for the other can lead to delays, financial setbacks, or legal disputes. This article clarifies their differences, backed by real-life examples, to help you make informed decisions. What is a succession certificate? Asuccession certificate, issued by a civil court underthe Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Part X, Sections 370–390), authorises the holder to collect and managemovable financial assets like bank accounts, shares, or bonds when the deceased leaves no will or executor. It's vital for contested cases or high-value assets, offeringjudicially enforceable authority to settle debts and securities. In a 2022 Madras high court case, P. Venkatachalam vs The Tahsildar (2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 265), petitioners challenged the authority of tahsildars to issue legal heir certificates for Class-II heirs (e.g., paternal relatives) in intestate succession. The court clarified that a legal heir certificate only confirms the relationship between the deceased and their heirs. It cannot replace a succession certificate, which is mandatory for claiming debts or securities under the Indian Succession Act. The court also struck down a 2019 Tamil Nadu circular limiting legal heir certificates to Class-I heirs, calling it illogical, and ordered revised guidelines. This ruling highlights the critical role of a legal heir certificate in financial asset disputes. What is a legal heir certificate? Alegal heir certificate, issued by revenue authorities like tahsildars or municipal officers, identifies the deceased's legitimate heirs. Used inuncontested scenarios, it facilitates administrative tasks such as transferring property titles, claiming pensions, or updating utilities. Governed by state-specific rules, it's faster and cheaper but holdslimited legal weight in disputes compared to the Indian Succession Act. A senior citizen's daughter once approached our office after her father's passing. He had no Will, but had left behind multiple fixed deposits and mutual funds. The bank refused to release the funds based on a legal heir certificate alone. They required a succession certificate, especially since another family member had also claimed entitlement. Without the correct certificate, she spent over five months in legal back-and-forth. Choosing the wrong certificate can be costly. One client assumed a legal heir certificate would unlock her late spouse's demat account. Due to the portfolio's value and a minor objection from a relative, the registrar required a succession certificate. The process took six months, delaying funds and causing distress. Early consultation with an advisor could have streamlined the process. Debunking myths A common misconception, particularly in states like Karnataka, is that legal heir certificates are exclusively for families of government employees. While Karnataka's 2025 policy imposes restrictions on pension-related cases, most states permit broader use for private asset claims, such as property transfers or insurance, when uncontested. Courts, as seen in P Venkatachalam vs The Tahsildar, have intervened to ensure revenue authorities issue legal heir certificates appropriately, reinforcing their utility in straightforward inheritance matters. Practical guidance Distinguishing between a succession certificate and a legal heir certificate is essential for seamless inheritance in India. Real-life cases like Venkatachalam and others highlight how the wrong choice can trigger delays or disputes. By selecting the appropriate documents, heirs can efficiently access assets, minimise legal hurdles, and honour the deceased's legacy in a hassle-free manner. Shraddha Nileshwar, head – will & estate planning at 1 Finance. Views are personal
The Hindu
11-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Changes to marriage, succession, criminal, tenancy laws suggested in policy brief to panel looking into issues of queer community
A new civil union framework to recognise 'non-marital intimacies', horizontal reservations for transgender people in education and jobs, 'safe and inclusive' access to washrooms, amendments to marriage, succession, and tenancy laws among a gamut of other laws, and a ban on treatments like 'conversion therapy', are just some of the recommendations and suggestions submitted to the Union government's high-powered committee that has been looking into issues faced by queer persons on account of their identity and non-recognition of queer relationships. After months of deliberations, public consultations, and expert inputs with and from the queer community, activists, lawyers, civil society, the policy think tank Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, in collaboration with NGO Keshav Suri Foundation, has sent in a detailed policy brief proposing executive and legislative actions for at least 12 Union Ministries and dozens of statutory bodies in the areas of recognition of queer relationships and families, discrimination in access to goods and services, queer affirmative healthcare, and prevention and prohibition of violence. These areas of concern were identified by the Supreme Court in 2023, when it decided the same-sex marriage case and the court had recorded that the Union government would form a committee to address issues persisting in these areas. Last April, a six-member panel headed by the Cabinet Secretary was formed to this end. The detailed policy brief with proposed action addressing hundreds of issues faced by the LGBTQIA+ community was submitted to the high-powered committee and the Cabinet Secretary in April this year, and the policy briefs on each of these areas are scheduled to be publicly launched on Saturday (July 12, 2025) in New Delhi. Among the recommendations made to the government are ones that call for amending the Special Marriage Act and the Indian Succession Act to make them gender-neutral; repeal the 'objection and notice regime' for the registration of marriages; 'move away from a gendered approach' to determining vulnerability in case of divorce proceedings; and recognising 'compulsory shares for all children' to prevent parents from discriminating on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity. Residence rights In addition, the recommendations call for a 'reform' of the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, suggesting that the law needed 'to rehaul its approach to the residence rights of transgender persons'. This includes the proposal to introduce horizontal reservation for transgender people in jobs and education and removing the requirement of medical procedure to identify within the binary genders of man and woman and setting up grievance redressal mechanisms to address private discrimination. The policy brief goes on to suggest amending criminal laws to protect people members of the LGBTQIA+ community from sexual violence, also recommending the re-introduction of the equivalent of Section 377 of the IPC so that non-consensual same-sex sexual violence can be provided for while leaving consensual same-sex intimate activity de-criminalised. It has also called for amendments to laws dealing with workplace harassment to be inclusive of queer individuals and fresh laws that comprehensively cover discrimination against them. The recommendations call for reservation for transgender persons in school education, higher education, and employment, also proposing their inclusion in school processes and student grievance redressal cells, building inclusive curricula, recognising and prohibiting discrimination against queer persons. They also call for ensuring that teachers in schools and universities are 'queer affirmative', and inclusion of transgender persons in 'gendered activities', including 'gender-based sports teams' as per their chosen gender identities, and the introduction of an 'open sports' category, along with many others. The brief also recommends amendments to tenancy laws, and cooperative society laws to prohibit discrimination on grounds of gender identity or sexual orientation. In addition to suggesting the country-wide expansion of the government's Garima Greh scheme for transgender people, the brief also calls for similar shelter homes for non-transgender LGBTQIA+ individuals who might need a safe space. The policy brief has also gone on to propose the banning of all forms of 'conversion therapy', prohibiting 'unnecessary intersex surgeries', and remove the blanket ban on blood donations for transgender persons, men who have sex with men, and female sex workers. The brief has also recommended the government to use its executive powers to issue clarifications and orders that provide for nomination benefits for people in queer relationships and families, urging the government to recognise queer relationships for the purposes of financial services, and proposing a nomination regime for social welfare benefits and in the labour and employment sectors.
Indian Express
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Waqf a secular concept… property dedication common across religions: SG
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta Tuesday told the Supreme Court, which began hearing the challenge against the amendments to the Waqf Act, that 'waqf, by its very nature, is a secular concept' and that the law does not touch upon any essential religious practices of Muslims. 'It may be noted that Waqf, by its very nature, is a secular concept. This is so since waqf merely means dedication of property,' Mehta stated in a 145-page note submitted to the Court. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India B R Gavai and Justice Augustine G Masih that began hearing the batch of petitions seeking an interim stay on the amendments observed that 'a very strong and glaring case' is needed to pause the operation of the law. 'There is a presumption of constitutionality in favour of every statute. For interim relief, you have to make out a very strong and glaring case. Otherwise, presumption of constitutionality will be there,' CJI Gavai observed. Solicitor General Mehta is expected to be heard Wednesday before the Court passes orders on the limited issue of interim stay. 'The elements of charity or religious dedication of property are common across all religions and specifically held by this Hon'ble Court to be a 'purely secular exercise'. The fundamental purpose of the Waqf Act is to confer statutory validity upon dedications while imposing certain duties and responsibilities. It is always open to Parliament to alter the statutory framework which conferred statutory validity to such dedications,' the note stated. Mehta quoted the 2003 Supreme Court ruling in John Vallamattom v Union Of India in which a Christian priest had challenged portions of the Indian Succession Act that placed certain conditions on Christians while bequeathing property to religious or charitable uses. Mehta's note also offers a clarification that de-recognition of the concept of 'waqf by user' will be 'prospective in nature.' 'The proviso (in the amended provision) ensures that any waqf, which was registered before the concerned authorities, would be protected.' The government has argued that the Mussalman Wakf Act, 1923 and every subsequent legislation on the issue mandated the registration of every waqf by user and that the 2025 law merely de-recognises any such waqf that has not been registered. However, the petitioners have argued that the 1923 Act or subsequent laws did not carry any consequences for failing to register which is why several waqf-by-user properties remain unregistered. 'It is thus clear that those waqfs which have not registered themselves (including 'waqfs by user') since 1923, 1954, or at least prior to 01.01.1996 (date on which Act of 1995 came in force) nor have they been found to be in existence during the survey by the Survey Commissioner and an independent exercise mandated by law from the State Waqf Board (as explained above) and have no legal existence and any belated claim at this stage is not maintainable. This legislative policy in the proviso, therefore, has a rationale and is not arbitrary,' Mehta's note stated. Apurva Vishwanath is the National Legal Editor of The Indian Express in New Delhi. She graduated with a B.A., LL. B (Hons) from Dr Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow. She joined the newspaper in 2019 and in her current role, oversees the newspapers coverage of legal issues. She also closely tracks judicial appointments. Prior to her role at the Indian Express, she has worked with ThePrint and Mint. ... Read More
