Page 116 - Communication Processes Volume 3 Communication Culture and Confrontation

The Indian Legal System 91

a share. Throughout the discussions, it was never mentioned that the
law divided the property between the widows and the adult children
(sons and daughters). The possibility of making a will was never raised.
No one said that a will could change the law and, therefore, deprive
a widow from her right to property. The findings illustrate that oral
transmission of the content of a law seems to play an important role
in the transfer of knowledge, even though this knowledge is based on
written evidence and modern values.
Diverse interpretations of the law also exist inside the legal system
itself. One widow went to court in order to claim her succession rights.
The court case lasted for ten years and the woman as well as her fam-
ily had to spend more then Rs 25,000. The judge finally decided that
she could not obtain a share in the husband’s property because she
had no children. The Hindu Succession Act does not stipulate that a
widow can inherit only if she has children. In another case the widow
was granted her rights after fifteen years and more than Rs 50,000 of
expenditure. However, although the judgment was delivered in 1998,
she had not received her share even after three years, the main reason
being that the brothers-in-law bribed the local police to stop the execu-
tion of the court’s decision. In addition, this widow and her children
were subjected to different acts of intimidation from the in-laws with
the aim to discourage her from claiming her rights. These two cases
illustrate that the legal system is not monolithic. This is also demon-
strated by appeal courts overruling the lower court’s decisions and
by the publication of majority and dissenting opinions by the judges
which show that they fail to reach consensus among themselves. Other
views on the property rights of widows may prevail over the official
law. As I mentioned previously, the Hindu Succession Act is seldom
used by widows. This indicates, as it was shown in the case discussed
earlier, that the implementation mechanisms of this law by the judicial
apparatus also varies.
Widows who did have a share of the property of the husband ob-
tained it under various circumstances. One widow, aged between 25
and 30, had received it automatically from her parents-in-law. She stays
with them and she takes care of the share of land under her name. Her
children being young, she is the sole owner of that part of the land.
Another widow, aged over 60, is the official owner of the house she
stays in. The in-laws built this house for her many years after the death