A daughter cannot be denied property ownership rights due to marriage or becoming a nun.

A daughter cannot be denied property ownership rights due to marriage or becoming a nun.

A daughter cannot be denied property ownership rights due to marriage or becoming a nun.

Kochi: In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that a daughter cannot be denied ownership rights over property for getting married or becoming a nun.

Justice S Easwaran made this clear while dismissing an appeal filed by a Vaikom native who had taken possession of his sister’s share of property by invoking such a condition in their family settlement deed.

ADVERTISEMENT

The father of the petitioner, a native of Vaikom,  had executed a family settlement deed in 1965, granting 10 cents of land to his daughter. However, the deed also contained a stipulation that her rights over the property would cease if she either got married or became a nun, in which case the property would pass on to her brother.

The woman got married in 1973, while her father passed away in 1983. As she later moved abroad, her brother subsequently mutated the property in his own name, citing the condition in the deed. Challenging the move, the woman approached the Munsiff Court, but failed to secure a favourable verdict. She later filed an appeal before the Kottayam Additional District Court, which ruled in her favour. Aggrieved by the verdict, her brother subsequently approached the High Court.

ADVERTISEMENT

In its order, the High Court observed that, under the Transfer of Property Act, any condition prohibited by law or opposed to public policy is void and cannot be enforced. The court held that a stipulation under which a daughter loses her rights over property upon marriage or upon becoming a nun, resulting in the property reverting to her brother, is legally unsustainable.

The court further pointed out that the transfer made in this case was absolute in nature. It also noted that the condition in the family settlement deed was void under the Indian Contract Act. Clarifying the legal position, the court held that the appellant’s sister enjoyed absolute ownership rights over the 10 cents of land granted to her.

ADVERTISEMENT