Family Law MCQs for Judiciary, Page 10

Correct answer: B. A female heir could not demand partition of a dwelling house wholly occupied by a joint family unless the male heirs choose to partition; this discriminatory provision was deleted by the 2005 Amendment to advance gender equality

Section 23 (pre-2005) provided that a female heir shall not be entitled to demand partition of a dwelling house wholly occupied by a joint family until the male heirs choose to divide their respective shares. This meant a daughter or sister could not force partition of the family home even if she was an heir. The provision was discriminatory in that male heirs could demand partition at will but female heirs had to wait. The 2005 Amendment deleted Section 23 entirely, giving daughters and female heirs equal partition rights with male heirs.

Source note: Section 23 (deleted), Hindu Succession Act 1956; Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005

Correct answer: B. A daughter is a coparcener by birth in the same manner as a son; she has the same rights and liabilities in respect of the coparcenary property as a son.

The 2005 Amendment to Section 6 HSA makes daughters coparceners by birth in their natal family with exactly the same rights and liabilities as sons. This includes: right to demand partition, right to alienate their share by will or otherwise, equal share in partition, and the ability to be the Karta. In Mrs. Sujata Sharma v. Shri Manu Gupta (2016) the Delhi High Court held that the eldest female coparcener can also be the Karta. Marriage does not affect the daughter's coparcenary rights in her natal family under the amended Section 6.

Source note: Section 6, Hindu Succession Act 1956 (as amended 2005); Mrs. Sujata Sharma v. Shri Manu Gupta (2016 DLT 647)

Correct answer: B. Husband's rape, sodomy, or bestiality after solemnisation; bigamy where husband married before commencement of the Act.

Section 13(2) HMA 1955 provides grounds for divorce available exclusively to the wife: (a) husband has, since solemnisation of the marriage, been guilty of rape, sodomy or bestiality; (b) husband married again before the commencement of the Act while the first marriage was subsisting (bigamy before 1955); (c) the wife has repudiated the marriage after attaining the age of 15 years but before attaining 18 years, and was married before attaining 15 years (option of puberty). These grounds specifically protect women in situations of sexual abuse within marriage and early marriage. Grounds under Section 13(1) apply equally to both spouses.

Source note: Section 13(2), Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Correct answer: B. Physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, or economic abuse; any conduct that harms, injures, or puts in danger the health, safety, life, limb, or well-being of the aggrieved person.

Section 3 PWDVA 2005 defines domestic violence comprehensively to include: (a) physical abuse (causing bodily pain, harm, danger to life or health); (b) sexual abuse (any conduct of sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades, or violates dignity); (c) verbal and emotional abuse (insults, ridicule, humiliation, repeated threats); (d) economic abuse (depriving of economic or financial resources the woman is entitled to). In Badshah v. Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014) 1 SCC 188 the Supreme Court held that maintenance under PWDVA can be granted even to a woman in a 'relationship in the nature of marriage' if the conditions of such relationship are satisfied.

Source note: Section 3, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005

Correct answer: B. Ancestral property is property inherited by a Hindu from his male ancestors up to 3 generations back (4-degree rule) - the coparceners acquire an interest in it by birth; self-acquired property is earned or acquired independently by a person through their own labour or as a gift from non-ancestral sources - coparceners have no birth right in it and cannot demand partition

Ancestral property in Mitakshara Hindu law is property inherited by a male Hindu from his paternal ancestors up to three generations (grandfather, great-grandfather, great-great-grandfather). The key characteristic is that coparceners (sons, grandsons, great-grandsons) acquire an interest in ancestral property by birth, not just on inheritance. Self-acquired property is earned by a person's own efforts or received as a gift from non-ancestral sources; no coparcener has a birth right in it. The self-acquired property holder can deal with it as absolute owner. After 2005 the daughter as coparcener also gets rights in ancestral property by birth.

Source note: Classical Hindu Law; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gomedalli Lakshminarayan AIR 1935 Bom 412

Correct answer: B. Yes; by virtue of Section 30 a Hindu may bequeath by will any property including his undivided interest in Mitakshara coparcenary property.

Section 30 HSA 1956 specifically provides that any Hindu may dispose of by will or other testamentary disposition any property which is capable of being so disposed of by him. The Explanation to Section 30 specifically provides that the interest of a male Hindu in Mitakshara coparcenary property shall be deemed to be property capable of being disposed of by him or by her within the meaning of the Act. This was a significant statutory innovation as under classical Hindu law an undivided interest in coparcenary property was not transferable by will.

Source note: Section 30, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. When she is living in adultery, or when she refuses without sufficient reason to live with her husband, or when they are living separately by mutual consent; however a divorced wife with no means and who has not remarried can also claim maintenance

Section 125 CrPC (summary remedy for maintenance) applies to all women regardless of religion. A wife loses her right to maintenance under Section 125 if she lives in adultery or refuses without sufficient reason to live with her husband or if they are living separately by mutual consent. The Supreme Court in Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014) held that Section 125 is a social justice measure and should be interpreted liberally. A divorced wife (who has not remarried and has no means of subsistence) can also claim maintenance under Section 125.

Source note: Section 125, CrPC 1973 / Section 144 BNSS 2023

Correct answer: B. A civil form of marriage available to any two persons in India or abroad regardless of their religion, nationality, or caste; it also applies to Hindus and enables solemnisation of marriage without religious ceremonies; marriage and divorce are governed by the SMA 1954

The Special Marriage Act 1954 provides for a civil marriage available to any two persons without regard to religion, caste, or nationality. It enables: (a) Hindus to marry Muslims, Christians, or persons of any other faith or no faith; (b) marriages without any religious ceremony; (c) inter-caste and inter-religion marriages with legal recognition. Once married under SMA 1954, the parties are governed by the SMA 1954 for matrimonial remedies and by the Indian Succession Act 1925 for succession (not by their personal laws). This is important: a Hindu marrying under SMA 1954 loses the benefit of HSA 1956.

Source note: Special Marriage Act 1954

Correct answer: B. The welfare of the minor; the court can override any statutory preference for a natural guardian if the welfare of the child so requires.

Section 13 HMGA 1956 provides that in appointing or declaring the guardian of a Hindu minor, the court shall be guided by what is best for the welfare of the minor. The welfare of the minor is the paramount consideration and overrides the statutory preferences in Section 6. Even where the father is the natural guardian under Section 6(a) the court can override this if the father's custody would be detrimental to the child's welfare. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the child's welfare encompasses physical, mental, emotional, and educational needs.

Source note: Section 13, Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956

Correct answer: B. Any person of any religion can adopt a child under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act; the right to adopt under jj Act is a secular right and cannot be denied on the ground of personal law; but it does not compel any person to adopt if their personal law prohibits it

In Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014) 2 SCALE 529 the Supreme Court held that adoption under the Juvenile Justice Act is available to any person in India regardless of their religion or personal law. A Muslim, Christian, or Parsi can adopt under the JJ Act even if their personal law does not recognise adoption. However, the Court clarified that it was not compelling anyone to adopt; it was only holding that the secular JJ Act adoption route is open to all. The Muslim personal law prohibition on adoption does not prevent Muslim couples from using the JJ Act route.

Source note: Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (2014) 2 SCALE 529

Correct answer: B. Is not an express statutory ground under the HMA 1955; the 71st Law Commission Report and Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2013 recommended its inclusion.

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not an express ground in Section 13 HMA 1955. The 71st Law Commission Report (1978) and the Marriage Laws Amendment Bill 2013 proposed its inclusion but the Bill has not been enacted. The Supreme Court has exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution in exceptional circumstances to grant divorce on this ground when all other remedies have failed and the marriage has permanently broken down. However, this is an exercise of constitutional power in specific cases, not a statutory ground available in family courts generally. Recent Supreme Court Constitution Bench decisions have expanded this power under Article 142.

Source note: Hindu Marriage Act 1955; 71st Law Commission Report; Marriage Laws Amendment Bill 2013

Correct answer: B. Only if there is no heir of Class I; Class II heirs take in the order specified in the Schedule - each entry in Class II excludes the next entry.

Class II heirs under Section 8 HSA 1956 take only when there is no Class I heir. Within Class II heirs themselves, succession is not simultaneous; it is determined by the order specified in the Schedule to the Act. The entries are numbered and within each entry the heirs take simultaneously, but entry I (father alone) takes before entry II (son's daughter's son, son's daughter's daughter, brother, sister), and so on. This creates an order of preference within Class II heirs themselves. After all Class II heirs, agnates take preference over cognates.

Source note: Section 8 and Schedule, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. Judicial separation keeps the marriage intact while relieving the parties of the duty to cohabit; it is a lesser remedy than divorce.

Section 10 HMA 1955 provides for judicial separation. Unlike divorce, judicial separation does not dissolve the marriage; the parties remain husband and wife and cannot remarry. The decree merely relieves them of the duty to cohabit. However, Section 13(1A)(i) provides that if there is no resumption of cohabitation for a period of 1 year after the decree of judicial separation, either party may petition for divorce. In T. Srinivasan v. T. Varalakshmi (1991 DMC 20) the court held that Section 13(1A) gives an independent ground for divorce without the petitioner needing to prove any matrimonial fault.

Source note: Sections 10 and 13(1A), Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Correct answer: B. The joint family does not automatically end; the sole surviving coparcener holds the property as absolute owner for the time being but the joint family can revive with the addition of a new male member (birth or adoption); the sole survivor can dispose of the entire property as if it were separate property

The Supreme Court in C.N. Arunachala Mudaliar v. C.A. Muruganatha Mudaliar (AIR 1953 SC 495) held that on the death of all other coparceners, the sole surviving coparcener takes the joint family property as his absolute property. He can deal with it as absolute owner: sell it, mortgage it, or make a will. However, the joint family status can be revived if a new coparcener is added by birth or adoption. The sole survivor's absolute ownership is subject to the potential disruption if a coparcener is added, in which case it reverts to joint family property.

Source note: C.N. Arunachala Mudaliar v. C.A. Muruganatha Mudaliar AIR 1953 SC 495

Correct answer: B. On the mother's side up to 3 degrees of ascent from the person concerned and on the father's side up to 5 degrees of ascent; two persons are within the sapinda relationship if one is a lineal descendant of the other within the limit or if they have a common lineal ascendant within the limit

Section 3(f) HMA 1955 defines 'sapinda relationship': on the mother's side it extends to 3 degrees of ascent including the person concerned (so the person + mother + maternal grandmother + maternal great-grandmother, counting upwards from the person). On the father's side it extends to 5 degrees of ascent including the person concerned. Two persons are sapindas if one is a lineal ascendant or descendant of the other within the limit, or if they have a common lineal ascendant within the applicable limit. Marriage within sapinda relationship is void under Section 11 unless custom permits.

Source note: Section 3(f), Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Correct answer: B. There is a rebuttable presumption in favour of the adoption; the courts shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of the Act unless and until it is disproved

Section 16 HAMA 1956 provides that whenever any document registered under the law for the time being in force is produced purporting to record an adoption made and is signed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption, the court shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of the Act unless and until it is disproved. This rebuttable presumption significantly eases the burden on the adoptive family in proving the validity of adoption; those challenging it must affirmatively disprove compliance.

Source note: Section 16, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956

Correct answer: B. An inter vivos gift transfers property during the donor's lifetime and requires giving, acceptance, and delivery; testamentary dispositions (wills) operate only on death.

Classical Hindu law recognised both inter vivos gifts (daan) and testamentary dispositions. A gift by a Hindu male of separate property during lifetime requires three elements: (1) the donor must have capacity; (2) acceptance by the donee; (3) delivery (actual or symbolic). For immovable property, Section 123 TPA 1882 requires a registered instrument. Testamentary disposition was restricted under classical law but Section 30 HSA 1956 has enabled coparceners to bequeath their undivided interest. Muslim law has strict limits on both gifts (cannot exceed 1/3 of estate by will) and the TPA governs gifts of immovable property.

Source note: Section 30, Hindu Succession Act 1956; Sections 122-123, Transfer of Property Act 1882

Correct answer: B. A person who commits murder or abets the commission of the murder of the intestate or any person whose death would debar such person from inheriting - such a person shall be disqualified from inheriting the property of the person murdered

Section 25 HSA 1956 disqualifies a murderer from inheriting the property of the murdered person or any person whose death would advance the murderer's claim. This is the Hindu law equivalent of the common law rule that no person should benefit from their own wrong. The disqualification applies only to the murderer and does not affect the rights of innocent heirs. Section 27 provides that the disqualified heir's share passes as if he had died before the intestate. Conversion to another religion does not disqualify inheritance under the modern codified HSA 1956, though Section 26 provides special rules for converted descendants.

Source note: Section 25, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. Sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons are under a moral and legal obligation to pay the antecedent debts (avyavaharika) of their father, paternal grandfather, and paternal great-grandfather; this obligation extends to the extent of their interest in the ancestral property; the 2005 amendment considerably weakened this doctrine

The doctrine of pious obligation (dharmic obligation) holds that sons are under an obligation to pay the lawful debts of their father. The creditor can enforce this obligation against the son's interest in ancestral property. However, the obligation does not extend to: (a) immoral or illegal debts (avyavaharika); (b) debts contracted after the father became insolvent; (c) debts contracted to pay gambling debts. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act 2005 significantly curtailed this doctrine by amending Section 6 to make daughters coparceners, changing the nature of coparcenary interests.

Source note: Classical Hindu Law; Section 6, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. Can be made in favour of either the wife or the husband at the time of the decree or at any time subsequent to it; the court considers income, property, and conduct of both parties.

Section 25 HMA 1955 is gender-neutral: the court may award gross sum or monthly payment to either the wife or the husband during the lifetime of the other. The court considers: income and property of both parties, their conduct, and other circumstances. The order is subject to variation or rescission on change of circumstances. An order in favour of the wife is vacated if she remarries. The Supreme Court in Padmja Sharma v. Ratan Lal Sharma (AIR 2000 SC 1398) held that in awarding alimony the court must keep in mind the standard of living the spouse was accustomed to during marriage.

Source note: Section 25, Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Correct answer: B. The widow takes one share; each surviving son and daughter takes one share.

Section 10 HSA 1956 distribishes Class I heirs: the heirs take per capita within their category but the children of predeceased heirs take per stirpes (i.e., together they take one share which their deceased parent would have taken). The widow (or widows) take one share together. Each surviving son takes one share. Each surviving daughter takes one share. The son's widow and their children together take one share (the share their predeceased son/father would have taken). This prevents the shares from being diluted differently based on how many branches survive.

Source note: Section 10, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. Custom or usage can override the statutory provisions in specified areas: custom can permit marriage between prohibited degrees of relationship (Section 5(iv) proviso) and between sapindas (Section 5(v) proviso); but the custom must be established by cogent evidence and must be ancient, certain, and reasonable

The HMA 1955 and other codified Hindu law statutes generally override custom, but leave specific spaces for custom. Section 5(iv) and (v) HMA allow marriage between prohibited degrees or between sapindas if the custom governing both parties permits it. The custom must meet the test established by courts: ancient and continuous observance, certain and definite in character, and reasonable and not immoral. The party relying on custom bears the burden of proving it. Custom cannot override fundamental provisions like bigamy prohibition or age requirements.

Source note: Sections 3(a) and 5, Hindu Marriage Act 1955

Correct answer: B. A second marriage performed without the ceremonies required by Section 7 HMA 1955 is not a marriage at all under the Act; the accused in a bigamy case under Section 494 IPC can only be convicted if the second marriage was a valid marriage solemnised with proper ceremonies

In Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1965 SC 1564) the Supreme Court held that a marriage is not 'solemnised' under Section 7 HMA unless the ceremonies required by Section 7 are actually performed. In this case the accused had gone through a second 'marriage' ceremony that was admittedly not performed with the requisite religious ceremonies. The Court held that without proper solemnisation there was no 'marriage' for purposes of Section 494 IPC (bigamy). This case established the importance of proper solemnisation for legal recognition of a Hindu marriage.

Source note: Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1965 SC 1564

Correct answer: B. Heirs related to the intestate by full blood shall be preferred to heirs related by half blood if the nature of the relationship is the same in every other respect; within the same class a full-blood heir takes before a half-blood heir

Section 18 HSA 1956 provides that heirs related by full blood (sharing both parents with the intestate) are preferred over heirs related by half blood (sharing only one parent) where the relationship is otherwise identical. For example, a full brother of the intestate takes before a half-brother. This rule applies where other aspects of the relationship are equal. Where a full-blood heir exists in a Class II category, a half-blood heir in the same category takes after the full-blood heir. The rule applies to all categories of heirs under HSA 1956.

Source note: Section 18, Hindu Succession Act 1956

Correct answer: B. A Hindu who converts to Islam only to solemnise a second marriage without divorcing the first wife cannot escape prosecution for bigamy under Section 494 IPC; the conversion does not dissolve the first Hindu marriage which is governed by the HMA 1955; the second 'marriage' is void

In Lily Thomas v. Union of India (AIR 2000 SC 1650) the Supreme Court held that where a Hindu man marries under HMA 1955, the first marriage continues to be valid. If he converts to Islam and tries to take a second wife, he cannot do so validly because: (1) his first marriage is still subsisting and governed by HMA 1955; (2) the HMA 1955 bars bigamous marriages; (3) the second marriage is void under Section 11 HMA. Such a person can be prosecuted for bigamy under Section 494 IPC. This prevented the misuse of conversion as a device to circumvent the HMA's monogamy requirement.

Source note: Lily Thomas v. Union of India AIR 2000 SC 1650