adoption & marriage: legal question

Patrick Olivelle jpo at UTS.CC.UTEXAS.EDU
Mon Nov 24 18:32:51 UTC 2003


The husband inherits the putrikaa's property from her father only in
the event she dies without issue. Putrikaa, in my understanding, is
clearly the owner of the inherited property, and not merely holding
it for her son. Jolly's Tagore Lectures made this point very clearly.
Of course, ancestral property, according to Indian law, could not be
alienated even by the father; the sons have an interest in it.


>Another question, or possible way of looking at it, is whether the
>putrikA would inherit, while her husband would not, but the husband
>would have the control of the property as husband, not as any sort of
>son or quasi-son of the decedent - the usual situation of husbands of
>heiresses in England and many European countries until a century or two
>ago, unless the marriage settlement provided otherwise.
>And then would the husband have less control over the property, e.g. to
>sell land, than if he had himself inherited, because he was really a
>sort of trustee for his sons by the putrikA, and neither he nor even
>perhaps his putrikA wife was an owner?
>Allen W. Thrasher, Ph.D.
>Senior Reference Librarian
>Southern Asia Section
>Asian Division
>Library of Congress
>Jefferson Building 150
>101 Independence Ave., S.E.
>Washington, DC 20540-4810
>tel. 202-707-3732
>fax 202-707-1724
>athr at
>The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the Library
>of Congress.

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list