Family Law 08
Family Law 08
Family Law 08
Mahr or Dower is a sum that becomes payable by the husband to the wife on
marriage, either by agreement between the parties or by operation of law. It may either
be prompt(Mu‟ajjal), or deffered(Mu‟wajjal).
According to Mulla, “Dower” is a sum of money or other property which the wife is
entitled to receive from the husband in consideration of the marriage. The word
„consideration‟ is not used in the sense in which the word is used in Indian Contract
Act. It is an obligation imposed upon the husband as a mark of respect to the wife.
Hon‟ble Justice Mahmood has said in Abduk Kadir v. Salima, that „Dower under the
Muslim law is a sum of money or the property promised by the husband to be paid or
delivered to the wife in consideration of marriage, and even where no dower is
expressly fixed or mentioned at the marriage ceremony, the law confers the right of
dower upon the wife‟.
The above opinions are based on the argument that marriage is a civil contract and
dower is a consideration for the contract. But it is submitted that the above opinions
are erroneous, because even in those cases where no is specified at the time of
marriage, marriage is not void on that recount, but the law requires that some dower
should be paid to the wit. Abdur Rahim correctly observes, “It is not a consideration
proceeding from the husband for the contract of marriage, but it is an obligation
imposed by the law on the husband as mark of respect for the wife as is evident from
the fact that the non- specification of dower at the time of marriage does not affect the
validity of marriage.
3. NATURE OF DOWER
Dower in the present form was introduced by the prophet Mohammad and made
obligatory by him in the case of every marriage. “Dower” in Muslim law is somewhat
similar to the demotion proper nuptials in Roman law. The important difference
however, is that while under the Roman law it was voluntary, and under the Muslim
law it is absolutely obligatory. The following points may be noted with respect to the
nature of Dower.
1. Analogy is often drawn between a contract for dower and one for sale. The
wife is considered to be the property and the dower her price.
In Abdul Kadir v. Salima, Mahmood. J., comparing the marriage and dower with
contract for sale and consideration, says “Dower may be regarded as consideration for
connubial intercourse by way of analogy to the contract for sale. The right to resist her
husband so long as the Dower remains unpaid is analogous to the lien of a vendor
upon the sold goods while they remain in his possession and so long as the price or
any part of it is unpaid and her surrender to husband resembles the delivery of the
goods to the vendee…”
Islam insists that dower should be paid to the wife herself. It sought to make dower
into a real settlement in favour of the wife, a provision for the rainy day and socially, a
cheek on the capricious exercise by the husband of his almost unlimited power of
divorce.
A husband thinks thrice before divorcing a wife when he knows that upon divorce the
whole of the dower would be payable immediately.
If dower be regarded as sale price, it must be paid to the father or the guardian of the
wife, since it is paid to the wife herself, it cannot be the price. It is a token of respect.
5. CLASSIFICATION OF DOWER
(i) Specified and (ii) Customary (proper)
The specified dower has been further divided into (a) prompt and (b) deferred.
Prompt dower is payable immediately on the marriage taking place and it must
be paid on demand unless delay is stipulated for or agreed. It can be realized
any time before or after the marriage. The wife may refuse herself to cohabit
with her husband, until the prompt dower is paid. If the wife is minor, her
guardian may refuse to allow her to be sent to the husband‟s house till the
payment of prompt dower. In such circumstances, the husband is bound to
maintain the wife, although she is residing apart from him.
It was held in Rehana Khatun v. Iqtider Uddin, that the prompt portion of the dower
may be realized by the wife at any time before or after consummation. In the case of
Mahadev Lal v. Bibi Maniran it was decided that prompt dower does not become
deferred after consummation of marriage, and a wife has absolute right to sue for
recovery of prompt dower even after consummation. Dower which is not paid at once
may, for that reason, be described as deferred dower, but if it is postponed until
demanded by the wife it is in law prompt dower.
It is only on the payment of the prompt dower that the husband becomes
entitled to enforce the conjugal rights unless the marriage is already
consummated. The right of restitution arises only after the dower has been paid.
As the prompt dower is payable on demand, limitation begins to run on demand
and refusal. The period of limitation for this purpose is three years. If during
the continuance of marriage, the wife does not make any demand, the limitation
begins to run only from the date of the dissolution of marriage by death or
divorce.
If the Kabin-nama, the marriage contract deed, fixes the amount of dower but fails to
show what portion of it will be prompt and what deferred dower, according to
Allahabad and Bombay High courts the proportion between the two should be fixed
on the basis of
(i) position of the wife, (ii) custom of locality, (ii) total amount of dower, (iv) status of
the husband.
Shia law- Under Ithna Ashari shia law if the Kabinnama fixes the total amount of
dower but does not specify as to what portion of it will be prompt and what deferred,
the whole of the dower is regarded as prompt.
In the Madras presidency, unless otherwise stipulated the entire dower is prompt no
matter the parties are Shia or Sunni.
Sunni law- According to Sunni law, in the absence of any family usage and statement
in kabinnama, half of the total amount is regarded as prompt and half as deferred.
(ii) Proper dower (Mahr-i-Misl)
Its size is to be determined in view of the socio-economic conditions of the parties
involved. If no mahr has been agreed or expressly stipulated by the parties, the
contract of marriage is still valid. This also means that if no mahr sum is specified in
the marriage contract, the husband is not thereby released from his liability to pay a
dower. Even a statement that no dower shall be paid does not change the position. In
these circumstances, what is known as the „proper dower‟ becomes due. It is worked
out on the basis of the mahr agreed for women of a similar social status to the wife.
Particularly relevant will be the mahr paid to other female members of the wife‟s
family, for instance sisters, paternal aunts and female cousins.
A dower is a woman‟s right to marital property. It is her right to receive a part of the
husband‟s income or estate if he dies in the course of the marriage. Dowry however, is
the woman‟s property that she brings into the marriage when she gets married. The
dowry law no longer exists in most of the states. Dower is a sum of money receivable
by the wife from the husband as a consideration for the marriage, whereas dowry is an
extra dower consideration payable by one party to the marriage to another on the plea
of bringing equality in marriage. Taking or paying or abetting payment of dowry has
been made punishable.
In fact, the main contention of the Muslim Jurists is that anything which comes within
the definition of meal can be the subject matter of dower. Thus, apart from the
personal services of the husband, any profits arising from land or business, debts due
to the husband, insurance policies, chooses-in-action, the sale proceeds of something,
may constitute valid dower.
If the subject matter of dower be “an animal” or “cloth”, then the wife is entitled to
mahr-ul-misl, proper dower because such dowers are invalid for uncertainty.
Similarly, “a have” or “the land” without specifying the exact location and description
are not fit subjects of dower, and the court will have to fix proper dowers in such
cases.
The father of a minor son may make a contract on dower on his behalf and it would be
binding on the son even if it was made after his marriage during the minority of the
son. The father, if he acts as guardian for the marriage of his infant son, he is not
personally liable unless he expressly becomes a surety for the dower stipulated.
Otherwise the father only acts on behalf of the minor son and binds the latter and not
himself personally. When a father enters into a contract of dower on behalf of his son,
he makes himself a surety for due payment of dower in case his minor son has no
means of paying it.
(c) Specified or proper dower, whichever is less, in the case of irregular marriage.
1. When divorced by the husband: Half of the specified dower, in case of regular
marriage: in case of regular marriage. A present of three articles if unspecified: in case
of regular marriage.
2. When divorced by the wife: No dower. If the marriage is irregular in the weses
and above: No dower.
The Shiah Shara‟ya says: “there is no limit either to the maximum or the minimum of
dower,” it being a matter of contract between husband and wife; So long as the article
given or assigned by way of dower possesses any definite value, the assignment is
considered valid. There is no distinction so far as this principle is concerned between
the Shias and the Sunnis. Both schools, however, regard excessive dower as improper
though not absolutely illegal; but, as will be seen, this recommendation is totally
disregarded by the Indian Musulmans, for reasons which have been explained in the
Introduction.
The early Hanafi lawyers fixed ten dirham, as the minimum for dower. The Malikis
inhabiting a poorer and less populous country than that in which the early Hanafi
lawyers flourished, considered even a smaller sum as permissible.
These minimums have become obsolete and it is now customary in different countries
to fix the amount of dower entirely by a consideration of the circumstances of the
husband and wife.
Among Sunnis there is no maximum; any amount may be fixed. Some of the sects of
Shias, however, there is a tendency “not to stipulate for a sum higher then the
minimum fixed by the Prophet for his favourite daughter Fatima, the wife of Ali,
namely 500 dirham.‟‟
But the remission made by the wife, should be with free consent. It was held in the
case of Nurunnessa v. Khaje Mahommed that where the wife was subject to the
mental distress, on account of her husband‟s death the remission of dower, was
considered as against her consent and not binding on her.
In has been held in a (Karachi case) Shah Bano v. Iftekar Mohammed, that in certain
cases remission of dower cannot be upheld. For instance, if a wife feels that the
husband is increasingly showing indifference to her and the only possible way to
retain the affection of her husband is to give up her claim of Maher and forgoes her
claim by executing a document, she is not a free agent and it may be against justice
and equity to hold that she is bound by the terms of the deed.