Ancient Indian Patriarchal Society intentionally disregards the women's right to
property, pushing her to a position of inferiority in social and economic
aspects of human relationship. Ancient Hindu law was particularly denied sexual
and economic freedom to the women. In support of this premise, it is emphasized
that Manu, the first law giver stipulated; "A women must be dependent upon her
father in childhood, upon her husband in youth and upon her sons in old age.
She
should never be free"[1]. She has always been treated as an inferior creature as
compared to their male counterparts. This inferior status of the woman exists
not merely in their households and in the society but also in the matter of
privileges and right. Our Constitution envisages women as a citizen of India
will be treated as equal to man in all walks of life.
To obtain the object of
Constitution, several amendments introduced in Succession laws, however, it has
caused disparity between females. This paper analyses the position of different
category of woman that is mother, widow and daughter in old succession law and
after new amended Act.
Succession under Hindu Law Ancient period:
One of the most important Smritis in the Vedic period is Manusmriti. Manu speaks about the law which prevailed during that period.
Manu IX 106 stated that on the birth of the first son, he is freed from debt to manes and is therefore worthy to receive the whole estate. This established a relationship between ancestral worship and the law of inheritance.
The son born to a person was considered competent to offer oblation to the manes of the deceased ancestors and procure salvation for them. Therefore, he was given the right of inheritance to the estate of the deceased ancestors.
The son, grandson, and great-grandson were considered competent to worship the manes of deceased ancestors. The brother's son was also treated as a son for the purposes of offering funeral oblations in the absence of one's own son.
Property rights were not provided to daughters and female descendants as they had no duty to offer funeral oblations to the deceased.
Pre-Hindu Succession Act Scenario: Limited Property Rights for Women
Under traditional Hindu law, women had very limited rights to inherit property. Two main traditions for inheritance in India were the Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools.
Under the Mitakshara school, a woman was not regarded as a coparcener. On the other hand, the Dayabhaga school allowed a widow to inherit the property of her late husband, affording greater rights to women than Mitakshara law.
However, even under Dayabhaga law, if a widow died without a son, her property would pass to her nearest male heir, regardless of whether she had daughters.
The Hindu Succession Act was enacted in 1956 to bring about uniformity in inheritance laws and confer greater rights on women.
Hindu Succession Act, 1956
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was enacted to simplify India's inheritance laws. It applies to:
Any person who is a Hindu by religion, including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat, or a follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana, or Arya Samaj.
Any person who is a Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh by religion.
Thus, traditional Hindu laws no longer govern property succession among Hindus. Provisions of any law inconsistent with the Hindu Succession Act ceased to be valid for Hindus.
Traditionally, women generally had only one right— the right to maintenance in the family— and not inheritance or ownership rights.
Like Manu and Narada, most Smritis were restrictive regarding women's rights. Most Hindu religious texts treated women as dependent, requiring protection and considering them incapable of exercising independent authority.
Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937:
The object of this Act is to give better right to women in property. It
conferred new rights on the widow. She is entitled right over her husband
property for her maintenance. It is limited right of life estate alone and she
has no right to alienate such property except for accredited and sanctioned
purposes5. This Act does not provide any right to daughters.
Hindu Succession Act, 1956: This Act repealed the Hindu Women's Right to
Property Act,[4] 1937 and it was the first law which sanctioned absolute
property right to women. It has granted equal right to the daughter, widow,
mother and son. They are become Class I legal heirs of deceased male Hindu and
they are become eligible to obtain property right from their ancestor. However,
it had restricted rig[5]ht in respect of ancestral holding.
It has provided right by birth to male alone. But the said Act has modified the
coparcenary nature of property. As per old shastric law, the coparceners hold
the property as joint tenants and there is no automatic division will acquire in
such coparcenary. By introduction of this Act, the co-parcenars hold the
property as tenants-in-common and not as joint tenants.
Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Section 6 of the Act dealt with the
birth right of male Hindu in coparcenary property. This speaks about two modes
of devolution of undivided coparcenary interest that is by survivorship and by
intestate succession. [6]
The first mode, as given above, is strictly according to Mitakshara law,
whereas, the second mode is creation of this Act, which includes the female
heirs of Class I also, entitled to claim equal shares in coparcenary interest of
Mitakshara coparacenary. When a male Hindu dies after the commencement of Hindu
Succession Act, 1956, having an interest in Mitakshara Coparcenary property, his
interest in property shall devolve by survivorship upon surviving members of the
coparcenary in the absence of any testamentary disposition as per explanation of
Section 309 of the said Act.
But under the Proviso to Section 6, if a male Hindu died leaving behind a
'female relative specified in Class I of the Schedule'10 or a 'male relative
specified in that class who claims, through such female relative' the interest
of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by
testamentary or intestate succession as laid down in Section 8 of the Act and
not by survivorship.
After joint family property has been distributed in accordance with Section 8 on
principles of intestacy, the joint family property ceases to be joint family
property in the hands of various persons who have succeeded to it as they hold
the property as tenants in common and not as joint tenants. But the property
which devolves on him as a coparcener would continue to retain character of
coparcenery property in his hands
Acts Involved: Act 1 of 1990 and Act 39 of 2005.
Equality Principle:
Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India state that all people should be treated equally and no discrimination can be made based on sex. However, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 denied equal property rights to females in coparcenary property.
Amendments:
The scope of Section 6 was amended by TN Act 1 of 1990, inserting Sections 29A, 29B, and 29C.
A daughter was conferred the status of coparcener along with her father, but daughters married before 25.03.1989 were excluded.
Act 39 of 2005 introduced equal coparcenary rights for daughters at the Central level.
Effect of Amendments:
Daughters became coparceners by birth, equal to sons.
Removed the doctrine of pious obligation for sons.
Removed devolution by survivorship and added Section 6(3).
TN Act 1 of 1990 allowed married daughters (even before 9.9.2005) to claim coparcenary rights, unlike the Central Act.
The rights under Act 39 of 2005 apply to a living daughter of a living coparcener on 09.09.2005, irrespective of her date of birth.
Reduction of Share of Widow and Mother:
Both Acts reduced the widow's and mother's share in property as provided by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
Before amendments, under Section 8, mother, widow, and daughter had equal rights to property (but no rights in ancestral property).
Amendments gave daughters coparcenary rights, reducing the shares of the widow and mother.
Example: In a family with son, daughter, mother, and widow:
Old law: son 1/2, deceased father 1/2 → divided 1/8 each.
Amended law: father, son, daughter each 1/3 → on demise, each 1/12 for widow/mother, 5/12 for son/daughter.
Under Section 6(2), the daughter has absolute right over property by testamentary succession, unlike the son. The mother cannot inherit property left by the daughter.
Devolution of Female's Coparcenary Property:
Coparcenary requires a common male ancestor and his male lineal descendants (sons, grandsons, great-grandsons).
Ancestral property is inherited from father's father or father; other inherited property is separate property.
Essential feature: sons and grandsons have joint ownership by birth.
Section 23: Deleted by the 2005 amendment. Earlier, it restricted female heirs from seeking partition of a dwelling house unless male heirs agreed.
Section 30:
Originally: "Any Hindu may dispose of by will or other testamentary disposition any property, which is capable of being so disposed of by him."
Amended: "Any Hindu may dispose of by will or other testamentary disposition any property, which is capable of being so disposed of by him or by her."
Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act: Coparcenary Rights for Daughters
The concept of coparcenary is at the heart of Section 6. Coparcenary refers to descendants who can legally claim the property of a Hindu ancestor after he or she dies.
A woman could not claim inheritance as a coparcener under the provisions of the original Act.
The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, modified this discriminatory clause.
As per the current version of Section 6, the daughter of a coparcener shall:
by birth become a coparcener in the same manner as a son;
have the same rights in the property as she would have had if she had been a son;
be subject to the same liabilities as that of a son.
It further states that any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener.
Section 14 of Hindu Succession Act: Absolute Ownership of Property for Women
Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 says, "Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner."
Property under Section 14 covers both movable and immovable property. These are how a female Hindu may acquire a property:
Inheritance;
Partition;
Maintenance or arrears of maintenance;
Gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her marriage;
Her own skill or exertion;
Purchase or by prescription;
Any such property held by her as stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act;
Or in any other manner whatsoever.
Section 15 of Hindu Succession Act: Succession in the Case of Female Hindu Ancestor
Section 15 states the order in which property should be passed on if a Hindu female dies without leaving a will. There are also some rules listed for it under Section 16.
This is the order of succession as per Section 15:
Sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the husband;
Heirs of the husband;
Mother and father;
Heirs of the father;
Heirs of the mother.
Section 16 of Hindu Succession Act: Order of Succession and Distribution of Property under Section 15
Section 16 elaborates on the rules which govern succession in the case of a female Hindu dying without a will. These are the rules it states:
Rule 1: Among heirs specified in Section 15, those in one entry shall be preferred to those in any succeeding entry, and those included in the same entry shall take simultaneously.
Rule 2: If any son or daughter had died before the female ancestor, leaving behind his or her children, the children of such son or daughter shall take between them the share which such son or daughter would have taken if they were alive at the time of the female ancestor's death.
Property Rights as a Mother in India
Under the Schedule of the Hindu Succession Act, a mother is a Class I heir. So her property rights are governed by the relevant sections, including Sections 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, and 16.
Property Rights for Daughters in India
Under the Schedule of the Hindu Succession Act, a daughter is a Class I heir. So her property rights are governed by the relevant sections, including Sections 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, and 16.
The Supreme Court's 2018 judgement in Vineeta Sharma vs. Rakesh Sharma & Ors is also important. It said daughters enjoy equal coparcenary status with sons irrespective of when they were born or if their father was alive on 9 September 2005, when the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 came into force.
Married Daughter's Rights in Father's Property
The marriage of a daughter has no relevance for inheriting property. As a daughter, she enjoys the same coparcenary rights as a son. Moreover, she is also a Class I heir. So relevant sections of the Hindu Succession Act will be applicable in this case.
Property Rights as a Married Woman in India
A widow is a class I heir under the Schedule of Hindu Succession. If a male
Hindu dies without leaving a will, property succession is governed by relevant
provisions such as Sections 8, 9, and 10.
Rule 1 under Section 10 says that if a Hindu male dies without a will, then the
widow, or widows if there's more than one, shall take one share.
Apart from this, all the rights which accrue to a daughter are also available to
a married woman.
Impact of the Hindu Succession Act on Women's Economic Empowerment
While transmission of property can lead to greater wealth and prosperity,
unequal and low transmission can lead to greater wealth inequality. In
particular, property inheritance is very important for women who don't have much
wealth and property to begin with. In such a scenario, land and property can
even become an important source of livelihood for a woman.
The Hindu Succession Act (Amendment) Act, 2005, significantly increased women's
likelihood of inheriting property. In certain cases, it also leads to an
increased age of marriage for women. Moreover, even if a woman has not inherited
property, the fact that she is entitled by law to do so can significantly
increase her bargaining power. In the Indian context, this can also lead to a
greater voice in terms of marital affairs.
Succession under Christian Law
Originally, women were not provided any property rights in Christianity. The Old Testament of the Holy Bible clearly shows that sons alone had property rights, and women were given gifts during marriage. For example, Abraham gave all he had to Isaac.
As per old custom, if there was no son, the property went to the brothers. This later changed, making daughters eligible to obtain property from their father if there was no son.
The Holy Bible states (word of Lord to Moses): 'If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter.' In the absence of a son, property devolved upon the daughter; if no daughter existed, it devolved on the brothers.
However, restrictions applied: to claim her father's property, the daughter had to marry within the clan of her father. Marrying outside the father's clan disqualified her from inheritance. The purpose was to keep property within the tribe and prevent its transfer to another tribe.
Ancient Christians followed the practice that no inheritance was transferred from one tribe to another. Women and mothers were granted only limited maintenance rights.
Christian law regards the man and woman as 'one flesh'; therefore, whatever the wife held became the husband's property.
After the arrival of Lord Jesus Christ, changes occurred regarding inheritance rights. Canon law guided the inheritance rights of Christian heirs across different communities.
The Hedaya Canon, the highest authority for Jacobites (1226–1286 A.D.), provided that female heirs (daughter, sister, aunt, etc.) would get a share equal to male heirs of the corresponding degree (son, brother, uncle, etc.).
During the British period, the Indian Succession Act, 1865, was enacted, later amended and replaced by the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Areas outside its jurisdiction followed different customary laws, such as the Travancore Christian Succession Act, 1092.
State of Travancore:
Before July 1949, Travancore was a princely state. The Travancore Christian Succession Act, 1092, governed intestate succession for Indian Christians there.
The Act provided that the widow or mother had only a life interest, ending at death or remarriage. Daughters were not entitled to inherit but received one-fourth of a son's share (or Rs. 5000, whichever was less) as Sreedhanam (dowry).
The Kerala High Court in Mathoo Philip v. Mathoo Ouseph held that a daughter given Sreedhanam was not entitled to further rights in her parents' property.
A full bench decision in Hariharasubramania v. Mathu Thresia affirmed this position: daughters with Sreedhanam had no inheritance rights if a son was alive.
The Madras High Court in Solomon v. Muthiah held that the Travancore Christian Succession Regulation II of 1092 was repealed by the Part States (Laws) Act, 1951. However, this was overruled by the Division Bench in D. Chelliah v. G. Lalita Bai, affirming the validity of the Travancore Christian Succession Act.
Finally, in Mary Roy v. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court ruled that Christians in Travancore were governed by Chapter 11 of Part V of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, since the extension of the Part B States (Laws) Act, 1951. This repealed the Travancore Act retrospectively.
The Mary Roy judgment ensures equal inheritance rights for Christian women across India. However, although daughters now have equal rights, the concept of Sreedhanam continues culturally as dowry, and many properties are disposed of via testamentary succession.
Mother's Right under Christian Law:
Earlier, the mother had a life estate in the property of an intestate. Christian religion obliges children to maintain their parents in old age, as emphasized by the Senior Citizen Maintenance Act.
Under the Indian Succession Act, 1925, the mother has no direct share in the property of a deceased intestate unless there are no lineal descendants or father. If the father and children are alive, the mother has no rights in such property.
The father inherits the property in the absence of children, excluding the mother, brothers, and sisters.
Mother will entitle share in the absence of father only and she has to share
with brothers and sisters of intestate and in their absence, she has to share
with their children. Only in the absence of brothers, sisters and their
children, it will belong to her after deducting the share of widow. In addition,
she has given equal right with brothers and sisters but on comparing with
brothers and sisters, she will be a most dependent of intestate, therefore, the
Indian Succession Act has failed to provide appropriate share to the mother of
intestate[22].
Succession under the religion of Islam:
Inheritance is an integral part of Islamic Shariah Law and its application in
Islamic society is a mandatory aspect of divine teaching of Islam.
The Quran's guidance on inheritance of wealth left by a deceased person begins
with a general direction that all surviving male and female relatives have
definite shares in inheritance, whether large or small.
This is followed by a definite prescription that the deceased should leave a
living will or bequest before death for his or her near relatives. The Quran
specifies exact shares for a number of male and female heirs. The shares of
other eligible heirs are determined either residuary or by applying the rule
that the male heir gets twice as much as the corresponding female heir.
he verses of Quran in 4:1138[23], 4:1239[24] and 4:17640[25] are set out the
inheritance rules of Muslims. This provided right to the female in each category
that is widow, mother, sister and daughter provided right of inheritance in
deceased property. There is no distinction regarding succession in male and
female property.
The newly introduced Quranic rules of inheritance giving shares to wives,
daughters, mothers, and, in some cases, sisters constituted definite reforms of
the existing patriarchal system.
As per Muslim law, the men and women have right in property which left by their
parents as per their Holy book of Quran. Although, there is no equality in
shares of son and daughter, it has provided share to daughter, sister, wife and
mother, therefore, the said law is in existence till date without any
modification. But, it has provided constant shares to the mother and wife.
Conclusion:
India being secular State, each person has right to follow their own
religion in their own way as per the Article 25 of Indian Constitution. As the
property right has specified in their religion, each people permitted to follow
their personal law and the same has included in Concurrent List (Entry 5).
The Indian Succession Act, 1925 and Muslim Law provided right to female also but
Hindu Law had not provided property right to female Hindu before 1956.
Therefore, on applying principle which enshrined in Article 14 and Article 15 of
Constitution of India, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, has provided property
right to the female Hindu also.
However, son alone becomes eligible to acquire property right by birth in
respect of coparcenary property. This disparity also removed by way of Hindu
Succession Act (amendment) Act, 2005 by giving birth right to the daughter and
abolition of pious obligation which was available to the son alone. Although,
the Manu speaks about right after death of father, the Mitakshara School evolved
birth right relying upon the religious obligation which provided to son by
birth. On removal of such pious obligation and automatic notional partition as
per statute, the joint title and ownership over such property has lost.
Section 19 (b) of the Act also clearly stated that the persons having the
property as tenants-incommon and not as joint tenancy. Consequently, the nature
of coparcenary and purpose of coparcenary as per manu and mitakshara law had
already modified.
The Supreme Court of India also clearly observed in Uttam Case, on distribution
of property as per the Proviso of Section 6, it ceases to be the nature of
coparcenary property. The property acquired by male Hindu under Section 6 of the
Act alone retained as coparcenary property along with other properties by way of
applying the principles of blending. Once the property put into common hotchpots
of ancestral property, then it will lost the nature of separate property and it
also has to be construed as ancestral property.
Though, Act 39 of 2005 is a significant advancement towards gender equality and
economic security of daughters in Hindu Law, yet other females such as mother
and widow have not been given recognition as coparceners. In the absence of such
recognition, the property acquired by a female hindu cannot be construed as
co-parcenary property in respect of her child because in such circumstances, her
status became a Mother. Section 15 (2) (a) of the Act also causes disparity
relying upon sex by providing right to father and denying right to the mother
even in respect of property acquired from mother.
Section 15 (1) denied any inheritance right to mother in the presence of heirs
of husband. Consequently, by uplifting the share of daughter injustice caused to
mother and widow. Justice and equality cannot be secured for one category of
women at the expense of another. Therefore, law must be changed to confer equal
property right to all Hindu women's in ancestral as well as separate property.
As already discussed, the Christian Succession also does not provide any right
to the mother although she has to be maintained as per religion and Senior
Citizen Act. On reading of Christian Succession law which was in existence in
Travancore area (Kanyakumari District and Kerala) before 1956, the mother has
provided life estate although no right provided to daughter.
But, the present Succession Act has caused injustice to the mother. On contrary,
Muslim law provided constant right to mother, wife, sister and daughter but it
had provided fewer shares to daughter than son.
As per Section 4 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens
Act, 2007, each children has duty to maintain his/her parents but there is no
succession/inheritance provided to mother in Christian law.
Similarly Mother has no constant right in female property in Hindu law. The
succession right and maintenance right which provided to widow and mother in
Hindu law in respect of property of male before Act 39 of 2005 even in ancient
period is reduced. In the absence of any right in property, it is critical to
enforce such duty against their property. In old age, the mother being exclusive
dependence of children, she has to be provided with equal and adequate right by
making appropriate amendment in personal law of Hindu and Christian Succession.
End Notes:
Manu Chapter IX verse 106: 'Immediately on the birth of his first son, a man is freed from the debt to the manes. That son therefore is worthy to receive the whole estate'.
Manu Chapter IX, verse 137
VISHNU P.65- 'Amongst brothers begotton from one father, son of one brother is the son of all and must present funeral oblations'.
Section 19(b) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Narasimhanchari v. Andalammal, (1978) 2 MLJ 524
Proviso to Section 6 - Provided that, if the deceased had left him surviving a female relative specified in class I of the schedule or a male relative specified in that class who claims through such female relative, the interest of the deceased in Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship
Where a Hindu dies after the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, his interest in the property of the Joint Hindu Family governed by the Mitakshara law, shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship, and the coparcenary property shall be deemed to have been divided as it is a partition
Section 6 (4) of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 - After commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005, no Court shall recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great-grandfather solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, of such son, grandson or great-grandson to discharge any such debt
Prakash v. Phulavati (2016) 2 SCC 36
M.Krishnamoorthy vs K.Pondeepankar, (2017) 3 CTC 170
Chintaram v. Rushibai, 2000 AIHC 1308 (MP) relying on K.P.Lodhi v. Har Prasad AIR 1971 MP 129, Roshan Lal v. Dalipa, AIR 1985 HP 8, R.A.Patil v. A.B.Redekar, AIR 1969 Bom 205.
Omprakash and others v. Radhacharan & others, (2009) 15 SCC 66
Bhagat Ram v. Teja Singh, AIR 2002 SC 1
Holy Bible - And the Lord said to Moses, 'The daughters of Zelophehad are right. You shall give them possession of an inheritance among their father's brothers and transfer the inheritance of their father to them. And you shall speak to the people of Israel, saying, 'If a man dies and has no son, then you shall transfer his inheritance to his daughter. And if he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers. And if he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father's brothers. ... (Numbers 27:6-11)
Holy Bible - "This is what the Lord commands concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, 'Let them marry whom they think best, only they shall marry within the clan of the tribe of their father. The inheritance of the people of Israel shall not be transferred from one tribe to another, for every one of the people of Israel shall hold on to the inheritance of the tribe of his fathers. And every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the people of Israel shall be wife to one of the clan of the tribe of her father, so that every one of the people of Israel may possess the inheritance of his fathers. So no inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another, for each of the tribes of the people of Israel shall hold on to its own inheritance'. …. Numbers 36:6-9"
Present Kerala State and Kanyakumari District in Tamil Nadu called as State of Travancore.
AIR 1978 Mad 66.
13 Travancore LJ 354(FB)
Sections 16, 17, 21 & 22 of Travancore Christian Succession Act.
1092 27 AIR 1965 Ker 220
AIR 1986 SC 1011
Travancore LJ 354(FB) (1974) 1 MLJ 53
Quran 4:11 - God commands you, with respect to your children, that the male shall inherit the equivalent of the share of two females. If there are only females – two or more, then they should receive two-thirds of what he leaves; but if there is only one female, she is entitled to one-half. To each of his parents, one-sixth of what he leaves, if he has any children; but if he has no children, then his parents will inherit him, the mother receiving one-third. But if he has any brothers (or sisters), then his mother receives one-sixth. (The distribution in all cases) after any will he had made or any debt he had incurred [is taken care of]. Your parents and your children—you know not who of them is nearest to you in terms of benefit. A directive from God; God surely is All-Aware, Wise.
Quran 4:12 - In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, you get a fourth; all after payment of legacies and debts. In what you leave, their share is a fourth, if you leave no child; but if you leave a child, they get an eighth; all after payment of legacies and debts. If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother and or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they share in a third; all after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by God; and God is All-Aware, Most Forbearing.
Quran 4:176 - They ask you for a legal decision. Say: God directs (thus) about those who leave no descendants or ascendants as heirs. If it is a man that dies, leaving a sister but no child, she shall have half the inheritance. If (such a deceased was) a woman, who left no child, her brother takes her inheritance. If there are two sisters, they shall have two-thirds of the inheritance (between them); if there are brothers and sisters, (they share), the male having twice the share of the female. Thus does God make clear to you (His law), lest you err. And God has knowledge of all things.
Award-Winning Article Written By: Advocate Manisha G
Comments