Goa High Court: Daughters Have Right to Family Property Even After Receiving Dowry
The Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled that a daughter’s right to family property does not end even if she was given dowry at the time of marriage. The court made this observation while quashing a property transfer that was carried out without the daughter’s consent.
Court Invalidates Property Transfer Without Daughter’s Consent
The case involved a woman who challenged a deed that transferred her rightful share of family property to her brothers. Justice MS Sonak, who presided over the case, ruled in favor of the daughter, stating that there was no evidence to prove that she had received sufficient dowry. Even if dowry was given, it would not take away her legal rights to family property.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, the eldest daughter in a family of 10, had been declared a legal heir by her late father, Antonio Martins. However, her brothers and mother transferred a family-owned shop to two of her brothers through a deed dated September 8, 1990. The daughter challenged this transfer, claiming it was done without her approval and sought to have it declared invalid.
Her brothers argued that all four sisters had received dowry at the time of marriage and had no further claim to family property. They also contended that the shop had been merged into a partnership firm and was no longer an individual family asset.
Legal Findings and Ruling
- The trial court had initially ruled against the daughter, canceling her succession rights.
- The first appellate court overturned this decision, restoring her right to inheritance.
- The daughter then filed a second appeal before the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court.
The High Court observed that the daughter only became aware of the transfer deed weeks before filing her suit, making her case valid under the Limitation Act, 1963. The court noted that there was no evidence proving she had prior knowledge of the transaction, making her appeal legally acceptable.
Furthermore, the court cited Articles 1565 and 2184 of the Civil Code, which state that parents cannot sell or mortgage property to one child without the consent of all children. It also ruled that oral partition claims by the brothers were invalid as the law requires property division to be documented in public records.
Final Judgment
The court ruled that the brothers’ arguments were weak and did not override the daughter’s legal inheritance rights. It declared the property transfer null and void, affirming the daughter’s rightful claim to the family property.
This landmark ruling reinforces the legal rights of daughters to inherit property, regardless of whether they received dowry at the time of marriage.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
