March 7, 2024

Live in relationship and inheritance of property – current scenario

This article is written by Ms. Akriti Gauri 2nd year law student Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida.

ABSTRACT:

A live-in relationship is not officially or legally recognized by Indian law or society nor defined anywhere. It is a frequent practice in the Western world. People can live together for a variety of reasons under one roof and marriage does not play a crucial element in cohabitation. However, in the last two decades, the concept of live-in relationships has come to light with some drastic changes in society. The reason for this could be urbanization and westernization that has been taking place. The concept gives an eye check regarding the compatibility of the partner before tying the knot or getting married legally. The sole recognized legal union in India is marriage, thus cohabiting couples are not entitled to the same protections and legal rights as married couples. The absence of official acknowledgment and safeguarding for cohabitation can pose difficulties for partners, particularly in the event of dissolution or disagreements about real estate and possessions.

The live-in relationship is highly opposition and still a debatable issue regarding its implications on societal relationships. They have to face many challenges like social insecurity, legal protection, societal pressure, or stigma. A live-in relationship has traditionally been frowned upon and stigmatized in society. The legalization of Live-in Relationships has brought with it many new issues which include succession of property in the case of Live-in Relationships. This article will check or take a look into the current position of it in India. And recent developments in the succession rights of live-in relationship partners.

Keywords: Cohabitation, legal status, inheritance, societal stigma, live-in relation – a taboo. 

 

INTRODUCTION: 

The term i.e., live-in relationship is a post-modern coined. It means living with the partner under the same roof, sharing all the responsibilities of each other but without getting legally binding that means no marriage. However, it is not new to the society as it is quite similar to Gandharva vivah (one of the eight marriages being mentioned in the Manusmriti). Gandharva vivah is a form of marriage that is being done secretly between a man and a woman without accompanied by mantras, unlike marriage. And there is another concept of “Maitri Karar” which was a notion akin to today’s live-in partnerships that were practiced in Gujarat. It was a system in which a man and a woman may live together and have an intimate connection without being officially married, even throughout the lifetime of a wedded spouse. The man was supposed to financially support his friend, who was in a sexual relationship with him but now declared void. 

The live-in relationship got recognition in 1978 for the time in case of Badri v. Dy. Director of Consolidation, it was determined that a live-in relationship between consenting individuals of marriageable age and sound mind is legal under Indian law. The Supreme Court ruled that if a couple has been living together for a long period, their connection is deemed to be that of marriage. Live-in relation was considered as social taboo and still it is in many places. It is like an unpopular view regarding marriage which encourages the taboo like this. The very landmark case S Khushboo v. kanniammal where the s Khushboo supports the pre-marital sex regarding the live-in relationships get a lot of criticism as obscene and defamation. Later on, the Supreme Court having merely unpopular view did not amount to crime and quashed the defamation complaints. India does not recognise live–in relationship nor have any statutory provisions especially for it to deal but in many instances the Supreme Court recognizes the relationship as a valid and not illegal activity. The constitution of India under article 21 i.e., the right to life and personal liberty which also guarantees the right to live and the right to choose a partner. Although it is still highly debated in India and get criticized. This unalienable fundamental right entails people the right and freedom to marry or live with someone of one’s choosing. The couple needs to be above the age of 18 years and therefore, minors cannot or should not indulge in a live-in relationship. The live-in couple must have been together for an extended period. Their relationship should not be a “walk-in, walk-out” arrangement, and society should acknowledge them as husband and wife. In the case of D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal, the Supreme Court ruled that a ‘relationship in the type of marriage’ under the 2005 Act must meet certain characteristics. (a) The couple must present themselves as spouses, (b) be of legal marriage age, (c) be qualified to marry, including being unmarried, and (d) have lived together in a ‘shared household’ for a significant period. 

The property right is a basic and yet important right of a being. The property has to be acquired by the predecessors. Although there are no legal restrictions on live-in partnerships, the court ruled that they are not legally protected. Inheritance rights have always required property to be valid. Because of this, the courts have continuously made sure that no child born after a reasonable length of live-in partnership is denied the right to inherit under Article 39(f) of the Indian Constitution. 

 

SUCCESSION OF PROPERTY: 

Inheritance is the transferring of properties, titles, and obligations to the legal heir of a person upon his/her death. It can be done by either a will or through laws of succession. There are different aspects of different religions regarding marriage, divorce, and inheritance. It has been granted recognition under any personal law status whether it is the Hindu Succession Act, or Christian Personal Law, or Islamic Law. Although there are no legal restrictions on live-in partnerships, the court ruled that they are not legally protected. Nonetheless, the legal situation of inheritance rights is rather ambiguous and unpredictable due to the lack of a statutory framework governing live-in relationships. Partners in a live-in relationship do not inherit each other’s property. The Hindu Succession Act of 1956 does not address the inheritance rights of a live-in partner. However, in Vidhyadhari vs. Sukhrana Bai, the court ruled that a couple that has lived together for a respectable period can inherit property from either partner. Live-in couples can inherit each other’s property through wills or gifts. Furthermore, they can possess their partner’s property either through a will or also through gifts. but cannot inherit their ancestral property.

However, the Supreme Court in 2008 said in its ruling that a child born out live-in relationship will enjoy the equal right of inheritance as a legal heir. In the case of Lalita Toppo v. State of Jharkhand the Supreme Court that the couple living together or in a live-in relationship will be considered married if they are sharing the same roof, living together for a long time, and have been accepted by society as a married couple. 

It was said by the Madras High Court that the child born out of cohabitation has the right to possess property. Even before 2010, a child born out of cohabitation was considered illegitimate but in the case of case, Bharata Matha v. R. Vijya Renganathan the Supreme Court gave the child a legal status and affirmed their inheritance claim in the property. The Hindu Succession Act, of 1956 provides the women’s right to ancestral property and self-acquired property regardless of marital status. In the case of Vidyadhari v. Sukhrana Bai, the Supreme Court ruled that the child would be recognized as a legitimate out of the live-in relation thus allowing them to inherit the property. 

The extent of the inheritance of the property has been extended as in the very first validity of a ward born out of cohabitation will be regarded as legitimate in the case of Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan. The Supreme Court held that a man and a woman are presumed to be married under Section 114 of the Evidence Act if they have lived together for a considerable period and share a residence. Consequently, their offspring will be considered legitimate and eligible to inherit a share of the family’s assets. 

In a live-in relationship, no statute in the current legal framework allows a person any succession or inheritance rights. Indian courts have addressed the legality of live-in relationships, but they have not addressed the other rights and obligations that exist as a result of such a partnership. The majority of Indian courts have attempted to mold such a long-standing relationship into marriage but with no rights. The ideal way to inherit is through a gift or a will.

 

CONCLUSION:

 

In India, cohabitation had been a taboo since British rule. This is no longer the case in metropolitan cities, but it is nevertheless common in rural communities with more traditional attitudes. The legal status of a partner’s inheritance rights in a live-in relationship is murky. The current legal framework lacks consistency and ambiguity. Individuals’ rights and obligations have become extremely vague as a result of the refusal to recognize and support relationships other than legitimate marriages. Separate law is required to avoid ambiguity, which leads to competing and varied opinions and judgments. Current legislation has ambiguous sections that must be amended to clarify the status and rights of children born from a live-in relationship. 

Live-in partners can legally claim inheritance if they have a genuine relationship, as outlined in the Velusamy Case. This is supported by judgments in Indian and foreign courts. It is thus possible to conclude that the judiciary has recognized the status of live-in partnerships in multiple noteworthy rulings. In such circumstances of protracted cohabitation, the courts have given inheritance rights. The Constitution guarantees people the property rights. Couples in live-in relationships have the right to inherit property. In many situations, various High Courts and the Supreme Court have ruled that live-in couples have the right to inherit self-earned property that is not ancestral. These occurrences are proof that the times are changing and acceptance of Live-in Relationships is expanding.

 

REFERENCES: 

 

 

Featured articles
THE DOCTRINE OF PREEMPTIVE DEFENSE: LEGAL IMPLICATIONS AND CONTROVERSIES
SEBI Regulatory framework for IPOs in India
     DEBENTURES – A Brief on Alternative Source of Capital
A study on the principle of separate legal entity and its exception
A comparative analysis between sole proprietorship and one person company
Legal aspects of second marriage

Related articles

All articles