Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 24 – Scope – Non-application. Section 24, which disqualifies certain specified widows on remarriage, applies only to the categories expressly mentioned therein and has no application to the widow of the intestate; remarriage of such widow does not affect her right of succession. (Paras 9–12)

advocatemmmohan

Insurance – Life insurance – Nomination – Legal effect – Section 39, Insurance Act, 1938.
A nominee under Section 39 of the Insurance Act, 1938 does not acquire any beneficial interest in the policy amount; nomination merely indicates the person authorised to receive the amount, which thereafter devolves in accordance with the law of succession.
(Paras 7–8)

Succession – Life insurance proceeds – Devolution.
On the death of the life assured, the amount payable under a life insurance policy forms part of his estate and devolves on his heirs in accordance with the law of succession applicable to him.
(Paras 7–8, 12)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Sections 8 and 14 – Widow – Absolute right.
Where succession opens after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the widow of the intestate is a Class-I heir and acquires an absolute interest in the estate by virtue of Sections 8 and 14.
(Para 12)

Widow – Remarriage – Effect on vested rights.
Once a right has vested in a widow under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, such vested right is not divested by her subsequent remarriage.
(Paras 10–12)

Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856 – Section 2 – Repeal – Non-application.
Section 2 of the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856, having been repealed and being inconsistent with the scheme of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, has no application where succession opens after 1956.
(Paras 2, 9–11)

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 24 – Scope – Non-application.
Section 24, which disqualifies certain specified widows on remarriage, applies only to the categories expressly mentioned therein and has no application to the widow of the intestate; remarriage of such widow does not affect her right of succession.
(Paras 9–12)

Writ jurisdiction – Mandamus – Insurance claim.
Where entitlement of heirs to insurance proceeds is clear on admitted facts and settled law, the High Court may issue a writ of mandamus directing the insurer to disburse the amount accordingly.
(Paras 12–13)

Result – Writ allowed – Equal distribution directed.
(Paras 12–13)

---

B. ANALYSIS OF FACTS

(No facts added beyond the record)

1. Life assured and policy
   Prem Kumar Yadav @ Bablu Kumar obtained a life insurance policy from LIC, nominating his mother, Mahasundari Devi, as nominee.
   (Paras 1–2)

2. Marriage and death
   After obtaining the policy, the life assured married the petitioner on 22-04-2015. He died intestate on 22-06-2017.
   (Paras 1, 12)

3. Subsequent remarriage
   After the death of the life assured, the petitioner remarried.
   (Para 2)

4. Dispute
   The nominee-mother claimed the entire policy amount on the basis of nomination. The widow-petitioner claimed 50% as a Class-I heir.
   (Paras 1–6)

5. Relief sought
   The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing LIC to distribute the policy proceeds in accordance with the law of succession.
   (Paras 1, 12)

---

C. ANALYSIS OF LAW

(Strictly as reasoned by the Court)

1. Effect of nomination under Section 39, Insurance Act, 1938

Relying on Sarbati Devi v. Usha Devi and Shipra Sengupta v. Mridul Sengupta, the Court reiterated that nomination does not confer ownership and that the nominee merely receives the amount, which must then be distributed according to succession law.
(Paras 7–8)

2. Applicable law of succession

The Court held that succession opened on 22-06-2017, after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Accordingly, succession was governed by Sections 8 and 14 of the Act.
(Para 12)

3. Rights of the widow

As the widow of the intestate, the petitioner was a Class-I heir and acquired an absolute interest in the estate under Section 14.
(Para 12)

4. Effect of remarriage

The Court held that once succession had vested in the widow under the 1956 Act, her subsequent remarriage could not divest that vested right.
(Paras 10–12)

5. Non-application of the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act, 1856

The Court traced the repeal of the 1856 Act and accepted the settled position that Section 2 thereof cannot operate to divest absolute rights conferred under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
(Paras 2, 9–11)

6. Scope of Section 24, Hindu Succession Act, 1956

The Court clarified that Section 24 disqualifies only the widows of certain specified relatives on remarriage and does not apply to the widow of the intestate himself. Hence, the petitioner’s remarriage did not affect her succession rights.
(Paras 9–12)

---

CONCLUSION / RATIO

Where succession opens after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the widow of the intestate acquires an absolute interest in the estate as a Class-I heir, and such vested right is not divested by her subsequent remarriage; nomination under a life insurance policy does not override the law of succession, and Section 24 of the Act has no application outside its expressly defined categories.
(Paras 9–12)