Widowed daughter-in-law entitled to maintenance from father-in-law’s estate: Supreme Court

A daughter-in-law who becomes a widow even after the death of her father-in-law can seek maintenance from his estate under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, the Supreme Court has ruled.

The Supreme Court has held that a daughter-in-law who becomes a widow after the death of her father-in-law is legally entitled to claim maintenance from his estate under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The ruling clarifies that the law protects all widowed daughters-in-law who are unable to maintain themselves, regardless of when their husbands died.

A Bench comprising Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti dismissed a batch of civil appeals and upheld the view that the expression “any widow of his son” under Section 21(vii) of the Act is clear and inclusive. The court ruled that it covers every widowed daughter-in-law, without distinguishing whether the son passed away before or after the father-in-law.

The case arose from a family dispute involving the heirs of late Dr. Mahendra Prasad, who died in December 2021. His daughter-in-law, Geeta Sharma, sought maintenance from his estate after her husband, one of Dr. Prasad’s sons, died in March 2023. The Family Court initially rejected her plea, stating that she was not a widow when her father-in-law died.

Also Read:BMIC still on paper after 30 years: Karnataka High Court asks State to rethink entire project

However, the High Court overturned that decision, holding that Geeta Sharma qualified as a dependent under the Act and directed the Family Court to determine the amount of maintenance. This ruling was challenged before the Supreme Court by other family members, including the widow of another son and a woman claiming to be Dr. Prasad’s long-term live-in partner.

The Supreme Court framed the key legal question as whether a daughter-in-law who becomes a widow after the father-in-law’s death can still be considered a dependent entitled to maintenance from his estate.

Interpreting Section 21 of the Act, the court noted that it defines dependents to include “any widow of his son,” as long as she has not remarried and cannot maintain herself from her husband’s estate or from her children. The judges emphasised that the law does not use the term “widow of a predeceased son” and that courts cannot add words that the legislature deliberately chose not to include.

Referring to Section 22, the court explained that all heirs who inherit the estate of a deceased Hindu are legally bound to maintain his dependents. Even if a dependent does not receive a share in the property through succession, she is still entitled to maintenance from those who inherit the estate.

Also Read:BESCOM launches Land Aggregator Portal to fast-track EV charging stations across Karnataka

The Bench also held that denying maintenance based solely on the timing of the husband’s death would violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as such a classification is arbitrary and unreasonable. It further observed that such denial could infringe Article 21 by exposing widowed women to hardship and loss of dignity.

Quoting Manu Smriti, the court noted that no close family member deserving of support should be abandoned. Upholding the High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Geeta Sharma’s petition is maintainable and must be decided on merits by the Family Court. The appeals were dismissed with no order on costs.