Skip to main content

Dower

 Dower


Mahr originally meant “ gifts given to the parents of the wife” and dower which was known as ‘sadka’ meant, “ a gift to the wife herself”, it was given in case of regular marriages and was approved by Quran. However, in modern times, both the terms have become synonymous and the term ‘sadka’ has been subdued. 

Dower is one of the important components of marriage under Muslim Law. One of the salient features of Muslim Marriages is the right of the wife to receive, and the liability of the husband to make available to her, what is known as dower. In the case of Abdul Kadir v. Salima, Justice Mahmood held that dower is a sum of money or other property promised by the husband to be paid to the wife in the consideration of marriage and if the amount of money or other property is not fixed in the marriage ceremony then also the wife has right to demand dower.

Islam insists that dower should be paid to the wife herself. It is a tool to protect the wife against the arbitrary divorce powers that are given to the husbands under Muslim Law. It puts a restraint on this power of the husband as at the time of divorce, a husband has to pay the remaining amount of the dower immediately. According to Muslim jurists, anything which comes under the definition of ‘maal’ can be a subject matter of dower such as- a pair of shoes, husband’s servants’ services to the wife etc. 


The object of Dower are:

  1. to enforce an obligation on husband as a mark of respect towards his wife,

  2. to place a check on the misuse of power to give divorce by the husband,

  3. to provide for her livelihood on the dissolution of her marriage, so that she can lead her dignified life after the death of her husband or divorce.


Dower can be categorised into two broad categories:

  1. Specified: it is the amount which is fixed by the parties at the time or after the marriage. The husband is bound to pay the specified amount irrespective of how unreasonable it might be. 

    1. Prompt (Muajjal Mahr): it is the amount which is payable to the wife on demand, it may be demanded by the wife any time before or after the consummation. Under customary law, if prompt dower is not paid to the wife on demand, she has a right to refuse conjugal rights. If the marriage has not been consummated, she can successfully refuse the suit for conjugal rights but in cases where the marriage has been consummated, this refusal can only extend till the prompt dower has been paid. The wife has a right to recover her prompt dower even after the death of the husband from his estate ( Hamira Bibi V. Zumaida Bibi, 1916).

    2. Deferred (muwajjal Mahr): it is the amount which is payable to the wife only on dissolution of marriage by death or divorce.

  2. Unspecified: In this, the dower amount is not fixed by the parties at the time or after the marriage. However, even if the amount remain unspecified, the husband remains under an obligation to pay it. 


Dower is very essential for Muslim women, as under the Muslim Law even if there is an agreement made by the wife before marriage stating that she will revoke her right of dower and will not claim for dower in future or she agrees to marry without any dower, that agreement will be invalid according to law. This has been done to safeguard the right of the wife against the power of husband to give divorce and to prevent its misuse. It also helps in preventing polygamy. 


Section 2 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 talks about the iddat period i.e. when a marriage is dissolved by separation or death, a woman is prohibited to remarry for a certain period of time, this predetermined time is known as iddat. If a woman remarried during the iddat period, it leads to cancellation of the second marriage. 


During the iddat period, a muslim wife is not entitled to claim maintenance out of her husband’s estate as she is herself an heir to it. This is because the liability of maintaining the wife lies only on the husband and not on the other heirs. If she did not receive her dower nor did she renounces it, she would be entitled to receive it as a first charge from his estate.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree