A legal question regarding widows right

I differ from the above reply that wife is having equal shares in ancestoral property of her husband and she can revoke the will of deceased for self acquired property.

Resoning :

The testator is having absolute right to appoint any person as a legatee or beneficiary and legatee should execute the Will carefully and in accordance with the law.

1. Will is the legal declaration of a person’s intention which he wishes to be performed after his death and once the Will is made by the testator it can only be revoke during his lifetime. 

2. A person cannot give his ancestors property in the form of a Will but he can make a Will only of his Self-Acquired property.

3. A Will does not involve any transfer, nor affect any transfer inter-vivos, but it is an expression of intending to appoint a person who will look after the properties after his (Testator) death. A Will regulates the succession and provides for succession as declared by the testator.

4. The term ‘Will’ is defined under ‘Section: 2(h)’ of The “Indian Succession Act, 1925”, means the legal declaration of the intention of a testator with respect to his property which he desires to be carried into effect after his death.

5. A testator is authorised with a power to appoint any person as beneficiary of his Will whereas ‘Section: 5’ deals with the law regulating succession to deceased persons moveable and immovable property.

Hence, it is quite clear that the man who is the testator in the prescribed query is holding an absolute right to assign any person for his self earned property, his question on such will is immaterial.

However, that man is not liable to write a will for an inherited property r/w indian succession act,1925.

The inherited property directly goes to the coparcenory/legal heirs of that deceased man. In hindu succession act, it is clearly mentioned that all mitakshara governed HUF has coparcenory birth by right i.e all legal heirs of that inherited properties will get equal shares irrespective of son or daughter by birth.

Thus, a wife doesn't have right under the ancestoral property of that said man prescribed with only a life interest till her child doesn't attain majority.

Now, according to the circumstances of the case as put by geeta jii before this Lci fofum:

1. According to domestic violence act 2005 she could file an application u/s 12 pertaining to the facts related to her ignorable conditions as stated with above paras in the query.

2. She could pray for RTR u/s 17 r/w under sec 19. and finacial reliefs under sec. 20,23 and 26.

However, the facts of the case in such case should directly reveal the conditions of a widow women who had crossed her emotional, social and physical contributions to built the infrastructure of such properties down the order along with her deceased husband.

3. Mere filling of dva 2005 will not give any relief until and unless the said will be treated under execution by her two sons and the conditions of an old widow wife as well as mother will become irreparable. 

4. The other option for such woman leaving this dva 2005  if her husband is no more in this world is as under:

A. The widow woman should get relief under 125 crpc filled against her two sons once her husband dies after such will.

B. The widow could get relief under senior citizen act filled against her two sons once that will is executed.

C. She could also try for monetry reliefs Under Hindu adoption and maintenance act 1956 led before her husbands pre decesed/after deceased.

PS:  My details as above is only for the deprived and destitute lady under facts and circumstances led down for her grave irreparable situation given by the querist. Hence no metro women would get any reief if she is educated, experienced and have other sources of income proved by the other side.

ESIS

Mr. Joshi what you have Posted about 15 hours ago is as under

You are absolutely right his wife has equally right in her husbands self acquired property , she had done equally efforts and supported him to earned the property , why not she asked to her husband to make a fresh will and give her enjoyment right in it till her death , otherwise tell her to file dv case and asked her stridhan , residence order , maintenance order for her and also restrain her husband to distribute the property among his sons through his will as she has equally right in it .

-----------------------

Now you read your first line what you are saying that wife had equall rights in husbands self earned/acquired property.

Dear mr. Joshi I think you are less with knowledge of law related to property.

Here i have to differ you that so far no law is made which gives the right on husbands either of the property.

The shares are given when the husband dies without any testation or on the wish of the husband as he thinks fit in doing so. Therefore, A/t hindu succession act all the heirs will get their shares by rule of legal heirs starting from 1-3. Hence in legal heir of succesors -1 wife and his children will get equall shares only when husband dies without any probate or will.

So, according to the query the man has absolute right on his self earned property whom to give and whom to not. Claiming of such shares after or before will execution will not revoke legally but morally she has to fight for it by taking a chance by the way of dva 2005 and that also prior to the demise of her husband.

But according to other sections which i have allready stated para A-C, she will get relief indeed.

Ps: my arguements are not baseless like what you have stated for your second reply. Kindly brush up your legal knowledge on certain acts and amendments related to property as well as hindu law.

ESIS

I too respectfully disagree with the views of learned Mr. Joshi on the subject query.  The man who bequeathed his property through a Will in favor of his sons alone ignoring his wife is not an illegal act  nor it can be held invalid in law.  That person has indisputable title over his self acquired property hence he has got absolute powers to dispose his property in the manner and wish he desires.   If he has left out his wife without allocating any property to her as her share in the Will, he may be having his own reasons for doing so, the sentimental issues cannot have any impact to the laid down provisions of law in this aspect.  In my opinion, even a case under DV act will be maintainable against her sons if she chooses that route.  As suggested above, at the most she can file a maintenance case against her sons (earning members) u/s 125 cr.p.c. or any other relevant law.

She has to question the validity of the will on the ground that the property (business as well as residential) bequeathed by her husband is not as a whole "self acquired property" and she has got a legitimate share as her stridhan was invested for expansion of the business.  You are right when you said that while she was managing the household chores and giving emotional support that the husband could invest all his energies free from any tensions to expand his business.  As her stridhan etc. went into business (and she has to prove this fact before the court), she will get her legitimate share and the remaining part will be distributed as per the wishes of the testator.  Firstly for not slipping away of her rights, she has to file a domestic violence case on the ground of economic abuse, as you already proposed and in that she has to claim her residential rights, irrespective of the deposition in the testament and also take a relief under this very Act to get a stay against dispossession of commercial and residential properties.  If she will be facing day-to-day hardship to meet the bare necessities, she should also claim for maintenance under this very Act.  Once she gets the interim relief, the beneficiaries of the will come to 'out of court settlement'  and she will get her survival for her life.  It is irony in our country (in most of the world), that women work equally if not more, but only 20% of the property is in the name of women.     

Sentimental values do not play any role in the law.  Law do not recognize the emotional support or encouragement or  support through handling housework, and offering help in conducting the business as a house's contribution  towards her husband's business expansion and she has to prove that she helped him financially through her streedhan in order to claim a share in the property.  Let us also speak only what law says and not out of court/law in this  aspect.  The querist asked for legal solution, so let the querist not be misguided.. If the wife's contribution and her sentiments were recognized by her husband, he certainly would have made an arrangement towards her settlement, if he has intentionally ignored her, he had his own reasons for doing so, thus even legally she cannot  claim a share out of his self acquired property.

Housewives who forsaking the lucrative careers come to matrimonial home to serve the husband and inlaws and get the honorific designation of 'house maker' will be pushed at the old age at the benevolence and munificence of the husband and sons.  If the husband bequeathes everything whatever he earned during his matrimonial period to his sons depriving the wife to the vagaries of life and forcing her to knock the courts of justice under Section 125 cr.p.c. for a meagre survival, it is due to the false belief that the properties in the name of husband are socalled "self acquired  properties" and wife does not have any right for her direct and indirect contributions.  The house wife's emotional contribution to the family, her physical efforts to sire and rear the children without asking any remuneration and her initial teaching to the  children still they start to acquire the knowledge can be definitely calculated in terms of the money and that part of her contribution can be partitioned out of the socalled "self acquired property" of the husband.  This acknowledging the contribution of the housemaker wife has been done by the hon'ble Supreme Court.  In Arun Kumar Aggarwal case (C.A. No.5843/10) Justice Ganguly in his separae judgment acknowledged housewife's contribution and assessed the monetary compensation her family was entitled due to her road accidental death from the insurance company.  I attach the file herewith.  Similarly, the nuance reading of the Domestic Violence Act provides such right to the housewife to take injunction against the dispossession of the property, where she can notionally show her right of ownership.  Even beyond the out of court settlement also housewife has got such a right, but in my earlier post why I mentioned about out of court settlement is only due to the reason that the opposite parties are her own sons and she is contesting for her bare survival.  It is quite ironic when a proposition is made that a woman's right can be obtained out of court, a jibe is made, but  most of the postings on this forum talk about 'involving elders' 'mediation efforts' etc. they are applauded.  At the end, I say that the woman in question has got a right to prove her share in the socalled self acquired property of the husband and she can challenge the will on the ground that her financial contribution and her house making efforts allowed the husband to acquire such properties on his own name in the name of 'self acquired' properties and she can expose the shamness in that concept of 'self acquired property'.  

Housewives who forsaking the lucrative careers come to matrimonial home to serve the husband and inlaws and get the honorific designation of 'house maker' 

------------------

 Oh really,,,,,,

If this is the case then why highly such qualified and educated housewives becomes parasites on husbands money when nobody stops her to feed herself with a job atleast a minimum wages she would earn even she would be 10th pass wife.

Our dva chacha doesnt leave any stone to be unturned when it comes for filing of domestic violence case.

His legal thesis are exclusively picked up by oxford dictionarys peculiar words as one would carry a dictionary to understand what he want to say.

Our dva chacha makes his own acts and amendments and applies on himself.

I think this bharat ratna dva 2005 is made in keeping the persona of our dva chacha,

This dva 2005 is made exclusively for one and only chandu chacha to experiment on all cases whether making an affidavit or making a will. He uses dva 2005 everywhere

I dont know which indian sucession act he had read that he tells that a legal will of sole owner will be revoked.

PS: Gr8 going chandu ke chacha ne chandi ki chamchi se domestic violence act 2005 case chakhaya

I salute you man you deserve dva 2005.  If i would have the power to give you padma bhushsan Then I would have designed a special padma bhushan engrafted with all sections of domestic violence act on it to give you the only lawyer who had filled dva 2005 in all 365 days through out the year.

ESIS