Maintenance of Wife, Children and Aged Parents

Sub-section (3): when she loses the right

A Hindu wife shall not be entitled to separate residence and maintenance from her husband if she is unchaste or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion.

That is the answer to MU's one-sentence question, and it is short: unchastity, or conversion. Two grounds and no others.

Two points of precision.

Sub-section (3) takes away separate residence and maintenance, that is, the right under sub-section (2). Its relationship with the general right in sub-section (1) is a fair question, and the safe statement is what the sub-section says: an unchaste wife or a convert is not entitled to separate residence and maintenance.

Note the asymmetry with the husband. His conversion is a ground for her to live apart under clause (f); her conversion disentitles her under sub-section (3). The same fact cuts opposite ways depending on which spouse it happens to, and that is a fair thing to point out in an essay on gender in the Act.

Section 19: the widowed daughter-in-law

Sub-section (1). A Hindu wife, whether married before or after the commencement of the Act, shall be entitled to be maintained after the death of her husband by her father-in-law.

The proviso limits it heavily. She is so entitled only to the extent that she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property, or, where she has no property of her own, is unable to obtain maintenance:

(a) from the estate of her husband, or of her father or mother; or (b) from her son or daughter, if any, or his or her estate.

Sub-section (2). The obligation is not enforceable if the father-in-law has not the means to do so from any coparcenary property in his possession out of which the daughter-in-law has not obtained a share; and the obligation ceases on her remarriage.

How to answer the short note

The structure is a ladder, and that is the point of the section.

She must first look to herself: her own earnings and property.

Then to her husband's estate, and to her father's or mother's.

Then to her own children or their estates.

Only then to her father-in-law, and even then only if he has coparcenary property in his possession out of which she has not been given a share.

And it ends if she remarries.

So the obligation is a last resort, charged on coparcenary property, and not personal. A father-in-law with a large salary and no coparcenary property owes her nothing under this section. That is the detail that distinguishes a good answer from a vague one.

The provision is a direct descendant of the joint family's duty to maintain its widows, described in [The Joint Family as a Social Security Institution], and it survives in a much reduced form: the family estate must still support the widow, and the individual need not.

Section 20: children and aged parents

Sub-section (1). Subject to the section, a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents.

Sub-section (2). A legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor.

Sub-section (3). The obligation to maintain an aged or infirm parent, or an unmarried daughter, extends in so far as the parent or the unmarried daughter is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property.

The Explanation provides that "parent" includes a childless step-mother.

The five things to say about section 20

The duty is on a Hindu, male or female. "His or her" throughout. A daughter is as liable to maintain her aged parents as a son.

Illegitimate children are included, in terms, and in both sub-sections (1) and (2). That is a real reform and it should be named.

A child's claim ends at majority, by sub-section (2), except that an unmarried daughter continues under sub-section (3) so long as she cannot maintain herself.

The parent must be aged or infirm and unable to maintain himself. A wealthy parent has no claim.

A childless step-mother counts as a parent. The Explanation is narrow and deliberate: a step-mother with children of her own is expected to look to them.

Section 20 is the provision the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 was built on top of, and the comparison is drawn in [The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act: the Claim]. In outline, this section requires a civil suit and applies only to Hindus; the 2007 Act gives a summary tribunal and applies to everybody.

Sections 21 and 22: the dependants

These are taken in full in the next chapter, and only their place in the scheme is needed here.

Section 21 defines "dependants" for the purposes of Chapter III, listing the father, the mother, the widow so long as she does not remarry, minor sons and certain grandsons and great-grandsons, unmarried daughters and certain granddaughters and great-granddaughters, the widowed daughter, and others, each subject to its own proviso about being unable to obtain maintenance elsewhere.

Section 22 imposes the obligation to maintain those dependants on the heirs of a deceased Hindu, out of the estate they inherit.

The difference between sections 18 to 20 and sections 21 to 22 is the one to hold. Sections 18 to 20 are obligations of a living person, enforceable against him personally. Sections 21 and 22 are obligations of an estate, enforceable against those who take it.

A worked example

Sunita married Prakash in 2012 under the Hindu Marriage Act. In 2019 he brought a woman into the house and began living with her openly. Sunita left and went to her parents. Prakash pays her nothing. Her widowed daughter-in-law, Nita, whose husband died in 2023, is living with Sunita and has nothing of her own; Nita's father-in-law is Prakash, who holds ancestral land as karta. Sunita's own father, aged seventy-four and infirm, also has nothing.

Can Sunita claim maintenance while living apart? Yes. Section 18(1) gives her a right to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime, and section 18(2)(e) entitles her to live separately without forfeiting the claim where the husband keeps a concubine in the same house in which she is living, or habitually resides with a concubine elsewhere. Clause (b), cruelty, and clause (g), any other cause justifying separate living, are also open on these facts.

Can Prakash defeat it? Only on the two grounds in section 18(3): that she is unchaste, or that she has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion. Nothing else disentitles her.

Can Nita claim from Prakash? Section 19 puts her on a ladder. She must first look to her own earnings and property, then to her husband's estate and her parents', then to her own children or their estates. Only then does the father-in-law come in, and then only to the extent that he has coparcenary property in his possession out of which she has not obtained a share. Prakash holds ancestral land as karta, so the obligation is enforceable; and it ceases on her remarriage.

Can Sunita's father claim from her? Yes. Section 20(1) binds a Hindu, male or female, to maintain his or her aged or infirm parents, and section 20(3) limits it to a parent unable to maintain himself out of his own earnings or property. He is seventy-four, infirm and has nothing, so the claim lies against his daughter as much as against a son.

Where does the amount come from? Section 23(2), the five factors, in [The Amount of Maintenance, and the Dependants].

What it does NOT mean

Section 18 is not dependent on a matrimonial petition. Unlike sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, it is a free-standing right enforceable by an ordinary suit.

Clause (c) of section 18(2) no longer exists. It was omitted by Act 6 of 2019 with effect from 1 March 2019, and the lettering now runs (a), (b), (d), (e), (f), (g).

Section 18(2) is not the same list as section 13. Clause (d), another wife living, and clause (e), a concubine, are not grounds of divorce; and clause (g) is a residual ground that section 13 does not have.

Section 19 does not create a personal liability in the father-in-law. It is enforceable only out of coparcenary property in his possession, and a father-in-law with a large salary and no coparcenary property owes nothing under it.

Section 20 is not confined to sons. It binds a Hindu "male or female", so a daughter is as liable to maintain her aged parents as a son.

A child's claim does not end at majority in every case. Section 20(3) continues an unmarried daughter's claim so long as she cannot maintain herself.

"Parent" in section 20 is not unlimited. The Explanation extends it to a childless step-mother only.

Quick revision

• s.18(1): a Hindu wife, married before or after the Act, is entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime, without any proceeding on foot.
• s.18(2): she may live apart and still claim on six grounds: desertion or wilful neglect; cruelty; another wife living; a concubine in the house or habitual residence with one elsewhere; his conversion; and any other cause justifying separate living. Clause (c) was omitted in 2019.
• s.18(3): she loses separate residence and maintenance if she is unchaste or converts. Two grounds and no others.
• s.19: a widowed daughter-in-law may claim from her father-in-law only after exhausting her own property, her husband's estate, her parents' and her children's; only out of coparcenary property in his possession out of which she has no share; and the obligation ceases on remarriage.
• s.20: a Hindu, male or female, must maintain legitimate or illegitimate children while minors, an unmarried daughter unable to maintain herself, and aged or infirm parents, "parent" including a childless step-mother.
• ss.21 and 22 shift the obligation from a living person to a dead person's estate, and are the next chapter.

Test yourself

1. When is a Hindu wife disqualified from claiming maintenance from her husband? Under section 18(3), if she is unchaste or if she has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion. Those are the only two grounds.

2. State the grounds on which a Hindu wife may live separately without forfeiting maintenance. Desertion, that is abandonment without reasonable cause and without her consent or against her wish, or wilful neglect; cruelty causing a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious to live with him; his having any other wife living; his keeping a concubine in the same house in which she is living or habitually residing with a concubine elsewhere; his having ceased to be a Hindu by conversion; and any other cause justifying her living separately.

3. On what conditions may a widowed daughter-in-law claim from her father-in-law? Only so far as she cannot maintain herself out of her own earnings or property, and cannot obtain maintenance from her husband's estate, or her father's or mother's, or from her son or daughter or their estates. The obligation is not enforceable unless the father-in-law has coparcenary property in his possession out of which she has not obtained a share, and it ceases on her remarriage.

4. Who must maintain an aged parent under section 20? Any Hindu, male or female, during his or her lifetime, so far as the parent is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property. "Parent" includes a childless step-mother.