Himachal HC affirms customary inheritance in polyandrous marriages
Photo used for indicative purpose only
Himachal HC affirms customary inheritance in polyandrous marriages
Shimla, July 26,
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the customary law governing inheritance in polyandrous marriages in parts of the Himachal’s hill regions, ruling that in such families the property of a deceased husband passes to the surviving co-husband or brother and not directly to his children.
Justice Rakesh Kaithal dismissed a RSA filed by Shamsher Singh and others, challenging concurrent judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court regarding inheritance rights over ancestral property.
The court held that the dispute was governed by customary law prevailing in polyandrous communities rather than the traditional Mitakshara school of Hindu law.
The case arose from a civil suit in which the plaintiffs claimed exclusive rights to the share of Madan Singh and a one-fifth share in the property of Devi Saran, contending that a family arrangement was void and that they were entitled to the inheritance through their father, Kali Ram.
The defendants maintained that the property had already been partitioned and that the inheritance had devolved according to the prevailing local custom.
Also read “Equality cannot wait”: Kinnaur’s veteran activist seeks end to gender bias in Tribal property laws
Referring extensively to historical records, including the Punjab State Gazetteers (1910) and Dr Y.S. Parmar’s book Polyandry in the Himalayas, the High Court observed that in the traditional Joridari system practised in parts of Rohru and Kinnaur, the surviving brother inherits the jointly held property while the children succeed only after the death of all the brothers.
The court noted that Naro Devi was the common wife of Madan Singh and Devi Saran and that the revenue authorities had rightly sanctioned the mutation of inheritance in favour of Devi Saran following Madan Singh’s death in accordance with the local custom.
Since the plaintiffs based their claim on Mitakshara law, which was held inapplicable, the appeal was found to be without merit and dismissed.
About the Author
