LI Network
Published on: 27 July 2023 at 12:37 IST
The Supreme Court of India delved into a significant and intriguing legal question concerning Hindus . The central issue under consideration was whether an illegitimate child born from a void or voidable marriage should be entitled to inherit the property of their parents or have coparcenary rights over ancestral properties belonging to a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF).
During the proceedings, some of the arguing counsels appeared to reach a consensus that as per Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, a child born from a void or voidable marriage should be entitled to an equal share of the parent’s property, similar to the legitimate children born from a valid marriage. However, certain other legal representatives raised doubts regarding whether this property would include the self-acquired assets of the parent or only the inherited ancestral property.
The arguments presented by the counsels delved into the depths of existing jurisprudence and brought to light several nuanced aspects arising from Section 16. This section offered clarification on the property rights of an illegitimate child, confining it solely to parental property. Notably, Section 16(3) explicitly states that such a child would have no rights over properties belonging to others.
Some legal experts interpreted this provision as a restriction on the rights of an illegitimate child over properties held within a Hindu Undivided Family. In an HUF, every child born to valid marriages within the family is entitled to a share of jointly owned property from the moment of their birth.
After a day-long session of engaging arguments, the bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra expressed their intention to reserve the verdict. However, multiple counsels requested to present further submissions on this matter, leading the court to schedule another hearing on Thursday.
The genesis of this legal issue traces back to a trial court in Karnataka, which, in 2005, ruled that children born out of illegitimate marriages had no coparcenary rights over ancestral properties of their parents. A district judge later overturned this ruling.
The Karnataka High Court weighed in on the matter and clarified that as per Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act, illegitimate children had rights only over the property of their parents and no one else. It further stated that if the HUF/ancestral property is divided upon the death of the parent, the illegitimate child may claim a share in the portion of property accrued to their parent, but this right would apply only if the parent died without leaving a will.
Subsequently, the Karnataka High Court’s ruling was challenged before the Supreme Court. In 2011, a two-judge bench referred the matter to a three-judge bench, which emphasized that children born out of illegitimate relationships should receive equal rights akin to those granted to children born in valid marriages.
Nonetheless, certain limitations on the property rights of such children were confined solely to their parents’ property. The current case before the Supreme Court aims to revisit and clarify this issue further.
