The right of disposal of the Stridhan varies with the nature of the Stridhan. For this purpose the Stridhan has been divided into saudayika and asaudayika Stridhan. During marriage the saudayika Stridhan could be alienated freely by her, but asaudayika Stridhan could be alienated by her with the consent of her husband only. This rule is subject to the condition that where husband and wife live together.
Where both have departed, asaudayika Stridhan can be disposed of by the wife even without the consent of her husband. Generally husband has no control over the Stridhan of his wife, yet in emergency he could still use and dispose the same without the consent of his wife. In calamities or for religious purpose or if the wife has taken the Stridhan, then its return or repayment depended upon the wishes of the husband.
During widowhood the woman has an absolute and unrestricted right of alienation of property, irrespective of the fact whether it has been acquired prior or after the death of the husband. Thus she can alienate the properties without any constraint.
So far as the question of succession to the property of a woman of bad character is concerned, her bad character does not extinguish the blood relationship. Thus her near relatives who have not professed the profession of bad character, can inherit the property. Her legitimate son will thus exclude her illegitimate daughter and her husband will exclude his illegitimate son. So far as the dancing girls are concerned the rules of succession were entirely different. These girls followed this practice due to their family custom or due to their family trends. In their reference no distinction existed between legitimate and illegitimate children. For these girls all children born to them were on the same footing and were treated legitimate whether the daughters of such girls were natural born, i.
e., Avras or Dattaka, they inherited as daughters. In Jagdamba v. Saroswati, it was held that a dasi putri and married daughter inherited equal shares in their mother’s property.
This view has also been approved by the Supreme Court. Succession to property of Devadasis and Dancing girls was carried out according to the customs and prevailing usages. No coparcenary developed between daughters and mothers. Hence no daughter could claim partition against her mother.