In a landmark decision, the Allahabad High Court has pronounced that property acquired by a husband in his homemaker wife’s name, particularly when she lacks an independent source of income, is recognized as family property. Justice ArunKumar Singh Deshwal highlighted the customary practice of Hindu husbands investing in assets under their wives’ names for the family’s benefit. The judgment stems from a case where a son sought co-ownership rights in a property acquired by his deceased father.
The court, invoking Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, underscored the prevailing cultural norm and presumed that unless proven otherwise, properties registered in wives’ names are considered family assets, given the common absence of independent income for homemakers.
The ruling clarified that this presumption stands unless evidence demonstrates that the property was purchased using the wife’s earnings.
The case involved Saurabh Gupta, the appellant and son, who filed a civil suit asserting his co-ownership rights in a property bought by his late father. The property was registered in the name of the appellant’s mother, who contended that it was a gift from her husband due to her lack of independent income. The appellant sought an injunction to prevent the property’s transfer to a third party, a plea rejected by the trial court.
In its judgment on February 15, the Allahabad High Court overturned the trial court’s decision, asserting that when a Hindu husband acquires property in his homemaker wife’s name, primarily from his personal income, it automatically assumes the status of joint family property. The ruling underscores the necessity to protect such property against unauthorized transfers or alterations.
This ruling by the court sets a significant precedent, acknowledging the nuanced nature of property acquired by husbands in their wives’ names in Hindu families. By establishing a presumption in favor of family property, the decision aims to safeguard the interests of homemakers and prevent undue transfers of assets. It provides clarity on the legal status of properties acquired under similar circumstances, emphasizing the need to protect familial rights and interests.
