CAN SONS FILE SUIT AGAINST MOTHER (HINDU) FOR STAY AGAINST TRANSFER OF SHARES / PROPERTY HELD BY MOTHER IN A FAMILY PROPERTY/ PRIVATE COMPANY ABSOLUTELY TO DAUGHTER?

Hindu law prohibits dowry. But dowry is given in one form or another.

Hindu Law after 2004 amendment gave equal right to married daughter in father’s property.

View of Author 

Equal property rights for married daughters are an important step toward fairness and gender equality. However, in some families this can also create tensions in relationships. After marriage, daughters may be influenced by their husband or in-laws, and when disputes over property arise, disagreements can escalate into legal battles or serious family conflicts.

While the intention behind laws like the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 is to ensure justice and equal rights, the practical implementation sometimes leads to strained family ties when expectations about property are unclear or contested. In such situations, disagreements over inheritance may even end up in court or cause long-lasting rifts within families.

Therefore, along with legal equality, maintaining open communication, clear property planning, and mutual understanding within families is important to prevent conflicts and preserve relationships. Law makers must prevent this situation resulting into strained relationships. Broken relations makes society psychologically weaker.

Continue… with article…

Let us see Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956.

  1. Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute property.―(1)Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner.

Explanation.―In this sub-section, “property” includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her marriage, or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any such property held by her as stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act.

(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or under a will or any other instrument or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award where the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a restricted estate in such property.

If the shares are the mother’s self-acquired property (bought by her or gifted to her), she has absolute authority to transfer them to anyone she wishes, and the sons have no legal standing to stop her during her lifetime.

Section 5 of the said Act provides for exception:

  1. Act not to apply to certain properties. ―This Act shall not apply to―

(i) any property succession to which is regulated by the Indian Succession Act, 1925 ( 39 of 1925), by reason of the provisions contained in section 21 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 (43 of 1954);

(ii) any estate which descends to a single heir by the terms of any covenant or agreement entered into by the Ruler of any Indian State with the Government of India or by the terms of any enactment passed before the commencement of this Act;

(iii) the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilagam Estate and the Palace Fund administered by the Palace Administration Board by reason of the powers conferred by Proclamation (IX of 1124) dated 29th June, 1949, promulgated by the Maharaja of Cochin.

LEGAL PERSPECTIVE:

  1. When Sons CANNOT Stop the Transfer (Self-Acquired Property) as per provisions of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956.
  • Absolute Ownership: Under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a woman is the absolute owner of her property (self-earned or gifted).
  • Right to Dispose: She can sell, gift, or transfer her shares to a daughter, stranger, or anyone else. Sons have no legal right to claim a share in her lifetime.
  • No Birthright: Sons do not have a birthright over the mother’s self-acquired property.
  1. When Sons CAN File for Injunction (Ancestral/Joint Property)
  • Ancestral Nature: If the shares were inherited by the mother from her ancestors (up to four generations back) and have not been partitioned, they are considered ancestral property.
  • Legal Restrictions: A person cannot transfer or gift ancestral property without the consent of all co-sharers (sons and daughters).
  • Injunction Valid: If the transfer is done without consent, sons can file a suit to challenge the transfer and obtain a stay (injunction) to prevent it. [6, 7]
  1. Key Factors when Courts will grant injunction:
  • Articles of Association (AoA): If the company is private, the AoA might have pre-emption clauses requiring shares to be offered to existing shareholders first.

When Can a Suit be Filed?

While a simple injunction based on “rightful share” usually fails, a son might attempt to file a suit under specific, high-burden circumstances:

  • Lack of Capacity: If he can prove the mother is not of sound mind or lacks the mental capacity to understand the transfer.
  • Undue Influence or Coercion: If he can prove the transfer is being made under pressure, fraud, or force rather than of her own free will.
  • Ancestral Property (Rare for Shares): If the shares were technically part of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and not her individual property, though this is uncommon for modern company shares.
  • Company Restrictions: If the company’s Articles of Association (AoA) have specific restrictions on transfers that are being violated.
  • Mental Competence: If the mother is elderly or forced into the transfer, the sons can challenge the transfer on grounds of coercion or unsound mind.
  •  Registration: If the transfer is done via a gift deed, it must be legally executed and registered to be valid.

Recent Judgment which quashes this view:

In the matter of Saurabh Gupta vs. Smt. Archna Gupta And 2 Others 2024 Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 105 it was held that, when wife is a home maker and  property is purchased by her husband in her name than she cannot transfer “This Court under Section 114 of Indian Evidence Act may presume the existence of fact that the property purchased by Hindu husband in the name of his spouse, who is homemaker and does not have independent source of income, will be the property of family, because in common course of natural event Hindu husband purchases a property in the name of his wife, who is homemaker and does not have any source of income for the benefit of family.”

Therefore, in such case prima facie the property is joint Hindu family property and protection of property from transferring to a third party is necessary, consequently this Court finds that the Court below, has not applied his mind despite being a prima facie case, and in such case protection is necessary against further transferring the property or changing the nature of same, if same is not protected, there are chances the property may be transferred or nature of property may be changed in that case even if the appellant’s suit is decreed, then he will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

Conclusion

Sons can file a suit for an injunction to stop a mother from transferring her shares to a daughter, except her self-acquired property or inherited ancestral property.

 

SHRUTI DESAI

6th April 2026