Widow's Right Over Husband's Property Ceases If Remarriage Proven: Chhattisgarh Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has observed that woman's right over the property of her dead husband will cease if her remarriage is "strictly proven" as per the law.

A bench of Justice Sanjay K Agrawal made the observation in a recent order while dismissing an appeal related to a property suit filed against Kiya Bai by her dead husband's cousin brother Loknath, who claimed that she had remarried as per local rituals.

"According to Section 6 of the Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act 1856, in case of remarriage, all the formalities for marriage are required to be proven," the order said.

"... The effect of the valid remarriage is the widow losing her right to the property inherited from the previous husband. Therefore, where remarriage is set up as defence, it has to be strictly proved, looking to devastating consequences to be befallen upon the widow in the shape of depriving her the right to property," it said.

As per the order, the dispute relates to the sharing of property of Kiya Bai's husband Ghasi, who died in 1942 in Chhattisgarh's Raigarh district.

The property in dispute originally belonged to Sugriv, who had four sons - Mohan, Abhiram, Goverdhan and Jeeverdhan - all dead now. Goverdhan had one son Loknath, the plaintiff in the case, who is also now dead, and Ghasi was the son of Abhiram.

Loknath had moved the court claiming that Kiya Bai, after her husband's death, remarried in 1954-55 through "Chudi" form (a traditional custom in Chhattisgarh where a man marries a widow by offering her bangles). Therefore, she and her daughter would get no share in the property being governed by clause 29 of the Raigarh State Wajib-ul-arz.

Kiya Bai, who also died during the pendency of the suit, and her daughter in a joint statement had said the partition of the property took place when Ghasi was alive.

The two had said that after Ghasi's death, they remained in possession of the suit property and Kiya Bai's name was included in the revenue records by tehsildar (revenue officer) in 1984 in accordance with the law.

They had said Kiya Bai never remarried and the civil suit should be dismissed.

After hearing the matter, the High Court in its order said there is no admissible evidence on record to hold that Kiya Bai had remarried and lost her right to the property.

"... as it has already been held that the effect of remarriage would be, widow loses her right in the property inherited from her husband and unless the fact of remarriage is strictly proved after observing the ceremonies required as per Section 6 of the Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act 1856, the fact of remarriage cannot be said to be established by which the right to property, which is a constitutional right, is lost that too by a widow," it said.

Earlier a trial court had held that Kiya Bai and her daughter were not entitled to any share in the property, which the first appellate court reversed, holding that during the lifetime of Ghasi and his father Abhiram, the suit property was partitioned and Kiya Bai remained in its possession after Ghasi's death.

After the Hindu Succession Act-1956 came into force, Kiya Bai became the full owner and as such, the plaintiff is not entitled to any decree, the appellate court had held.

Later, a second appeal was filed in the high court.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)