Husband Dies Without a Will — Who Inherits? Second Wife and Daughters From First Wife Have Equal Rights

When a Hindu male dies without leaving a Will, the question of who inherits his property — and in what proportion — is governed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. A recent Supreme Court ruling has clarified two important aspects of intestate succession: first, the equal inheritance rights of a second wife and daughters from a first wife; and second, the important principle that no co-heir can alienate the share of another co-heir, even by claiming to act as a Karta.

The Facts

The dispute arose from a partition suit filed in 1972 by four daughters of late Dajiba against their stepmother — Darubai, the second wife of Dajiba. The daughters claimed 4/5th share in the suit properties comprising agricultural lands and houses in Maharashtra, asserting that they and Darubai (the widow) were all Class I heirs of Dajiba who had died intestate.

The trial court decreed in favour of the daughters. The matter went through multiple rounds of appeal over decades. When it finally reached the Supreme Court, a bench of Hon'ble Justice Sanjay Karol and Hon'ble Justice Augustine George Masih settled the law.

The First Holding — Equal Inheritance Rights

The Court confirmed that under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, when a Hindu male dies intestate, all Class I heirs inherit simultaneously in equal shares. The Class I heirs under the Schedule to the Act include — among others — sons, daughters, and the widow.

In this case, the five Class I heirs were: Darubai (the surviving second wife/widow) and the four daughters from Dajiba's first wife. Each of them was entitled to 1/5th share in all the suit properties. The Court confirmed that the daughters from the first wife and the second wife stand on exactly the same footing as Class I heirs — the law draws no distinction between them.

The Second Holding — Tenants-in-Common, Not Joint Family

The Court clarified a point that has caused significant confusion in practice: when Class I heirs inherit intestate property, they hold it as tenants-in-common with definite and separate shares — not as a Hindu joint family with a Karta.

The practical significance of this is enormous:

• Each co-heir's share is definite and ascertainable — in this case, 1/5th each
• The concept of a Karta — who in a joint family can manage and alienate property on behalf of all — does not apply to intestate succession
• No co-heir can sell, mortgage, or otherwise alienate the shares of the other co-heirs, even if they purport to act as a Karta or manager
• Any alienation by one co-heir is valid only to the extent of that co-heir's own share — not the entire property

In this case, the stepmother had attempted to rely on a sale executed by one party claiming to act on behalf of all co-heirs. The Court held that this sale was valid only to the extent of the seller's own share, not as a transfer of the daughters' shares.

Common Situations Where This Ruling Is Directly Relevant

• Second marriages are common in families where a first spouse has died. Children from the first marriage frequently dispute the second wife's inheritance rights. This ruling confirms those rights are equal and cannot be denied.
• Property sold by one family member in the name of "managing the estate" — where no Will exists and no court-authorised administrator has been appointed — is a sale valid only for that person's share. Buyers should always verify that all co-heirs have joined in the sale.
• Agricultural land disputes frequently arise in this context — particularly where one co-heir has been in possession and may have attempted to mutate revenue records in their sole name. This ruling provides a clear basis for the other co-heirs to challenge such mutation.