The landmark Mary Roy case in SC; which gave Syrian Christian women equal right to property

The landmark Mary Roy case in SC; which gave Syrian Christian women equal right to property

Subject :Polity

Section : Fundamental Rights

Context:

Educator and women’s rights activist Mary Roy, who passed away on Thursday (September 1), was best known for the “Mary Roy” case, the prolonged legal battle that ensured equal property rights for women from Kerala’s Syrian Christian families.

1983 petition under Article 32

• Denied equal rights to her deceased father’s property, Mary Roy sued her brother, George Isaac, marking the beginning of a case that is seen as a milestone in ensuring gender justice in India.
• The key question before the Supreme Court was whether, in territories that once formed part of the erstwhile Travancore state, matters of intestate (a person who has died without leaving a will) succession to the property of Indian Christian community members were governed by the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1917, or by the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

Mary Roy’s plea

• The petition filed before the apex court said that the Travancore Succession Act violated Article 14 of the Constitution by discriminating on the basis of gender.
• Roy argued that the relevant provisions of the Travancore Succession Act discriminate between man and woman on the basis of gender and are, therefore, in violation of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, and that the Act was repugnant to Indian Succession Act 1925, which does not discriminate on the grounds of gender.

Verdict in the case

• The Supreme Court in its 1986 judgment upheld the supremacy of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India P N Bhagwati and Justice R S Pathak ruled that in case the deceased parent has not left a will, the succession will be decided as per the Indian Succession Act, 1925 which will also apply to the Indian Christian Community in the erstwhile state of Travancore.
• The verdict put an end to the socially-sanctioned practice in Syrian Christian families to deny women their rightful share in inheritance.

Hindu Succession Act, 1956

• The Mitakshara school of Hindu law codified as the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 governed succession and inheritance of property but only recognized males as legal heirs.
• It applied to everyone who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion. Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and followers of Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, are also considered Hindus for this law.
• In a Hindu Undivided Family, several legal heirs through generations can exist jointly.
• Traditionally, only male descendants of a common ancestor along with their mothers, wives and unmarried daughters are considered a joint Hindu family. The legal heirs hold the family property jointly.

Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005

• The 1956 Act was amended in September 2005 and women were recognized as coparceners for property partitions arising from 2005.
• Section 6 of the Act was amended to make a daughter of a coparcener also a coparcener by birth “in her own right in the same manner as the son”.
• It also gave the daughter the same rights and liabilities “in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son”.
• The law applies to ancestral property and to intestate succession in personal property, where succession happens as per law and not through a will.