Research paper submitted to Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai

In fulfilment of the requirement of Internal Evaluation for Crimes- I

PONDICHERRY’S LAWS OF SUCCESSION

Name: Prakruthi N

Enrolment number: 2020 073

Division: B

Semester: 4

Course: B.A L.L.B. (Hons)

Page | 1
Submitted to: Prof. James Mukkattukavunkal

Introduction

India is a very diverse country. This diversity is recognized by the laws of the land which allows
every community to be ruled by their own personal laws as opposed to a common set of laws.
Further, the legal system of India has evolved from the colonial times and is therefore heavily
influenced by the colonial masters ruling the nation at the time.

While the British colonized a majority of the country, some southern states were colonized by
the Dutch, Portuguese and the French. In 1674, the French founded Pondicherry. The French
retained control of Pondicherry for a majority of the time during the colonial period and heavily
influenced Pondicherry’s legal system.

Hindu law, even though largely derived from the same texts (ie. sastric sources) has been
differently interpreted under the English and French governments. In Pondicherry, when one
converted to Christianity, he still continued to be governed by some personal laws of the
religion he used to practice.1

Further, Pondicherry citizens had the option to be governed by the French Civil Laws instead
of their personal laws. Those who chose this were called Renoncants.

Hindu Laws of Succession

The Hindu Succession Act 1956 governs the succession of all Hindus, including those who
are domiciled in Pondicherry. However, this does not include the Renoncants as they gave up
their right to be governed by the same and instead chose to be governed by the French Civil
Code.

History of Hindu Laws of Succession

As per French laws a Hindu widow could adopt a child and similar was the case with a
French widow domiciled in French India also. The rights to succession for these adopted
children were held in the case of C.S. Natarajan Pillai v. C.S. Subbaraya Chettair.2 The
widow was domiciled in French India i.e. Puducherry and the adopted son was a domicile of

1
https://blog.ipleaders.in/study-intermingled-personal-laws-
pondicherry/#:~:text=Subbaraya%20Chettiar%2C%20the%20rights%20of,mother%20and%20the%20deceased
%20father.
2
C.S. Natarajan Pillai v. C.S. Subbaraya Chettair, A.I.R. 1949 P.C. 34

Page | 2
Madras. The domicile of the mother permitted her to adopt a child with or without her
husband’s consent, and the child would have the complete right to inherit her mother’s and
also her deceased father’s property. However as per the prevailing law in Madras 3 a woman
could adopt a child only after the appropriate consent of her husband and only then he shall
be identified as the son of her husband under law. When a woman died, the French courts
notwithstanding the fact of lex loci res sitae4 granted the possession of the woman’s property
in Puducherry to her son. But the Madras court did not agree to do so primarily because the
adoption by his father was disputed, and the lex situs governed the immovable property. The
major derivations from this case were that the lex situs should include the foreign law of the
last domicile of the propstius and heir to the immovable property should not be determined. If
the person adopting has the right to adopt according to his own lex domicile the status of the
adopted child can be created without reference to the law of the domicile of the adoptee prior
to adoption. Thus in the French legal system rights were given to women to adopt children
based upon their own discretion and these adopted children had all the right to inherit their
mother’s property too.5 The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 6 marked a great
difference in the Indian succession laws. Before 1956 a Hindu widow could not adopt a child
since she acted as an agent of the Hindu man for procuring a son and the main purpose of the
son was to continue with the family lineage of the father. After the Act was passed, the
widow could adopt for herself and did not need the permission of her husband’s sapindas and
the child was considered as that of the late husband’s as well. This was referred to as the
doctrine of ‘Relating Back’.7 This made it impossible for divorced women to adopt children
and start their life afresh if they wished to. Also, a son adopted by a Hindu widow could be
the coparcener as others with all the rights and liabilities of a coparcener. 8 But the adopted
son could not divest the heir of the property of the collaterals.9 Thus we see that French law
in the territory of Puducherry was a little more gender neutral and gave equal rights to women
for adoption. Comparatively, the Hindu law permitted widows to legally adopt in India after
the enactment of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

3
Madras was then under British rule and hence British law applied.
44
(Lex loci res sitae is latin for the law of the place where the property is situated).
5
J.D.M Jurrett, Private International Law Adoption, 20(1) WILEY THE MODERN LAW REVIEW, 65, 67 (1957).
6
The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, §8.
7
S.E. Thomas, Gender and Hindu Adoption law in India in Essays in family law in memory of B N Sampath Vol. II
: Gender, Human Rights and Law, 19, 25, (S.E. Thomas ed.,2013)
8
G.V.C.S RAO, FAMILY LAW IN INDIA 248 (Narender Gogia & Company, 10th edn., 2011).
9
Id.

Page | 3
 Renoncants

According to the Pondicherry (Administration) Act, 1962,

“All laws in force immediately before the appointed day in the former French Establishments
or any part thereof shall continue to be in force in Pondicherry until amended or repealed by
a competent Legislature or other competent authority.”

Accordingly, in Pondicherry, the French Civil Code continues to be applied to those of

French descent residing in Pondicherry. In the Indian Succession (Extension to Puducherry)
Act, 1980 “IA., it reads “Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the Renoncants of the
Union territory of Puducherry.”

However, it is interesting to note that being a renoncant does not equate to renouncing one’s
religion and their right to be governed by the laws of that religion.

In Thananjayan and Ors. vs. Palani and Ors10, it was held that “Therefore, I hold that the
substantial question of law is answered in favour of the appellants that a Hindu Renoncant in
Pondicherry is governed by the Coromandel Hindu Law of Pondicherry, by virtue of Section
2(A) of the Hindu Succession Act and the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act will not
apply”. The Coromandel Hindu Laws are in many ways, in principle, different from The
Hindu Succession Act.

For instance, under the Hindu Law prevailing in most of the country, there is a coparcenary
system between father and son. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005 extended
the same coparcenary rights to a daughter. However, the Coromandel Hindu Laws of
Pondicherry do not recognise this system and the head of the family retains complete
ownership of land, even after having children.

In The Superior Court of Appeal, Pondicherry in Appeal No. 326 of 1964, a three member
bench of which Maharajan, J. was the President held that “Under Hindu Law, as it is in force
in Pondicherry, Hindu sons do not acquire any interest in the father's property by birth
whether the property be the self-acquired property of the father or bit ancestral property.”

10
Thananjayan and Ors. vs. Palani and Ors. (29.03.2012 - MADHC): MANU/TN/0718/2012

Page | 4
Similarly, The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat), Application Act, 1937 does not apply to the
renoncants of Pondicherry. The Pondicherry (Extension Of Laws) Act, 1968 Act No. 26 Of
1968 added the clause ““Provided that nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the
Renoncants of the Union territory of Pondicherry” while extending the The Muslim Personal
Law (Shariat), Application Act, 1937 to Pondicherry.

Conclusion

The laws of succession in Pondicherry is vastly different from the rest of the country. The
French occupation and influence over Pondicherry has a huge role to play in creating this
difference. The most unusual difference in the personal laws of Pondicherry is that it allows
some citizens to be governed by the French Civil Code despite living in the territory of India.

Even despite creating a class of citizens called ‘Renoncants’, there is no expectation from
them to renounce their religion. The Hindu Succession Act is an attempt to codify the laws
applicable to Hindus throughout the country. Personal laws without such codification are
confusing and vague. Further, it is also not uniform and creates unnecessary complications.
Hindu laws in Pondicherry continue to be plagued by such vagueness and confusion as the
Coromandel Hindu Laws are not codified the way the Hindu Succession Act is.

For the same reason, these exceptions face a lot of criticisms from the public. Further,
applying the French Civil Code to a territory of India undermines the independence and
sovereignty of India in that region. However, such laws also ensure the culture of a place
remains India and is a essential to maintaining a federal balance in areas which are culturally
and historically different from the rest of the country.

Page | 5