Maintenance of Widowed Daughter-in-law

 

Q. 13. Discuss the basis of maintenance under Hindu Law. Also mention when a widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance from her father-in-law.

Or

Discuss the right of widowed daugher-in-law to claim maintenance from her father-in-law.

Or

Under what conditions a widowed daughter-in-law is entitled to obtain maintenance from her father-in-law.

 

Ans.

Hindu Law has recognized it to be obligation of joint family to maintain the wives and widows of coparceners. A widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance against the karta so long as the daughter-in-law has a right to claim maintenance against the coparcenary property in the hands of the father-in-law. However, father-in-law has no personal obligation to maintain daughter in law. If we look closely Section 19 & Section 21, 22 then there is no material difference between the two.

Liability of Maintenance under Hindu Law. The liability of Hindu to maintain others falls under two classes

 

(1) Personal liability, i.e., the liability arising from the mere relationship.

 

(2) Liability depending on the possession of property.

 

(A) Pesonal Liability.-Manu declared that "aged parents, chaste wife and an infant son must be maintained even by doing hundred prohibited acts."

 

The liability of Hindu to maintain others arising from the mere relationship are confined to wife, minor sons, unmarried daughters, and aged or infirm parents. The obligation to maintain these relations is personal in character and arises from the very existence of the relation between the parties. [State of Haryana v. Smt. Santra, AIR 2000 SC 1888] Sections 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act contemplate such liability.

 

Who are to maintain and whom?-The following persons are under a personal obligation to maintain others:

 

(i)                  Parents' Liability to provide maintenance to the children.— (Section 20, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act).-

Father or mother is bound to maintain:

 

(i) minor legitimate son,

 

(ii) minor illegitimate son,

(iii) legitimate unmarried daughter,

 (iv) illegitimate unmarried daughter.

 

(1) Husband's liability to maintain the wife [Section 18, Hind Adoptions and Maintenance Act)-The husband is bound to maintain his wife.

 

(iii) Liability of children to maintain aged or infirm parent [Section 20, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act)-The daughter is also bound to maintain her aged or infirm parents.

 

(2) Liability of maintenance dependent on possession of property. An heir is legally bound to provide, out of the estate which descends to him, maintenance for those persons whom the late proprietor was legally or morally bound to maintain. This obligation of an heir arises, from the fact that he possesses inherited property. When a Hindu takes property, he takes it subject to a legal obligation of maintaining persons "whom the deceased proprietor was morally bound to maintain."

 

The Karta (Manager) of a joint family is under a legal obligation to maintain all male members of the family, their wives and children. This obligation of Karta to maintain these persons arise from the fact that he is in possession of the joint family property. It is well settled that a father (now also a mother) is under a personal obligation to maintain his minor sons and unmarried daughters. If the father happens to be the manager of a Mitakshara coparcenary and has ancestral property in his hands, then the adult sons are also entitled to get maintenance out of the ancestral property. Similarly a person is not liable to maintain his grandson, but if he is also the Karta of the joint family property, he must maintain his grandson and great grandson. Grandson's or great grandson's right exists because there is common property, and status is joint.

 

B. Maintenance of widowed daughter-in-law

 

Under prior law before the commencement of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, it was only the moral duty of the father-in-law to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law, but this moral obligation was changed into legal obligation after the death of father-in-law. Heirs, who inherited the estate, were bound to maintain the widowed daughter-in-law out of the income from the estate of the father-in-law. The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 has, to some extent, converted the moral obligation of the father-in-law into legal obligation. Section 19 of the Act lays down

 

(1)    A Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be entitled to be maintained after the death of her husband by her father-in-law:

Provided and to the extent that she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property, or where she has no property of her own, is unable to obtain maintenance

 

(a) from the estate of her husband or her father or mother, or (b) from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate.

 

(2) Any obligation under sub-section (1) shall not be enforceable if the father-in-law has not the means to do so from any coparcenary property in his possession out of which the daughter-in-law has not obtained any share, and any such obligation shall cease on the remarriage of the daughter-in law.

 

The language of sub-section (1) is very alluring and fascinating. It brings the reader to illusion that the father-in-law is now bound to maintain his daughter-in-law. But sub-section (2) and the Proviso to sub-section (1) make disappear all such illusions and compels one to conclude that the father-in-law has no obligation to maintain her widowed daughter-in-law unless he gets some coparcenary property. It means the prior law, in this respect, continues, under which father-in-law was not liable to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law unless he possessed some property jointly held by her late husband and by himself.

 

Under Section 19 of the Act, the father-in-law's obligation to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law is not primary but only secondary. The widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance from her father-in-law only

 

(i) if she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property;

 

(ii) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her husband;

 

(iii) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her father;

 (iv) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her mother;

 

(v) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from her son;

 

(vi) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from her daughter;

 

(vii) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her son; (viii) if she is unable to obtain maintenance from the estate of her daughter,

 

(ix) if the father-in-law has such coparcenary property in his possession out of which she has not obtained a share.

The term 'coparcenary property' has been used in Section 19 (2) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act in ordinary or loose sense meaning the property which has been inherited from a common ancestor. Indeed the expression 'coparecenary property' has been used in contradiction to the term 'separate' or 'self acquired property'. [Gurdeep Kaur v. Ghamand Singh, AIR 1965 Punj. 238; Kapur Kaur v. Kishan Singh, AIR 1970 P & H 270]

 

Thus the obligation of the father-in-law to maintain her daughter-in-law is not personal but is limited to the extent of the coparcenary property in his possession. If the father-in-law has both the coparcenary property and the separate property, he must provide maintenance to the daughter-in-law to the extent of the income from the coparcenary property. The father-in-law cannot take the defence that the income from the coparcenary property is sufficient to maintain him and his other dependants. In Jai Kaur v. Pal Singh, [AIR 1961 Punj. 391], this was held by the Punjab High Court.

Section 19(2) of the Act indicates that the obligation to maintain a widowed daughter-in-law is confined to coparcenary property i.e. joint family property of Mitakshara joint family. In Kanailal v. Pushparani Pramanik, [AIR 1979 Cal. 172], the Court has observed that there is no question of a widow inheriting the share of her husband in any coparcenary property under the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law and the provision of sub-section (2) of Section 19 cannot be applied when the parties belong to the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law. However, Section 19(1) applies to Dayabhaga joint family also and it was held that under Section 19(1) of the Act the widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance.

In Janak v. Nandram 1 All. 249 (F.B.) The Court said that Hindu law recognize it to be a moral obligation of the father-in-law to maintain a daughter-in-law who has no other means of maintenance. On the death of the father-in-law, the moral obligation becomes a legal obligation against the persons who inherited the property of the father-in-law.

In Master Daljit Singh v. S. Dara Singh 2000 Del. 292 The Court said where father-in-law did not inherit any ancestral property, he was not liable to pay any maintenance to his widowed daughter-in-law.

Thus, in a Mitakshara joint family, the widowed daughter-in-law can claim maintenance when there is joint property and is not enforceable against self-acquired property. But in Dayabhaga joint family it is enforceable against the self-acquired property of the father-in-law.

 

Forfeiture of her claim.-The widowed daughter-in-law will forfeit her claim of maintenance if:

 

(a) she remarries, or

 

(b) she ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.