When a marriage dissolves, the paperwork of separation is rarely confined to the decree. Jewellery, household articles, gifts and funds presented around the wedding remain in one household or the other, and recovering them can spawn satellite litigation — civil suits, criminal complaints, DV applications. Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 offers a shorter road: it permits the court hearing any HMA proceeding to make provisions in the decree itself with respect to property presented, at or about the time of marriage, which may belong jointly to both spouses. This article explains what the provision covers, what it does not, and how to use it well.
The provision and its purpose
Section 27 reads, in substance: in any proceeding under the Act, the court may make such provisions in the decree as it deems just and proper with respect to any property presented, at or about the time of marriage, which may belong jointly to both the husband and the wife. The legislative idea is economy — the judge who has heard the marriage’s history is well placed to unscramble its property, and the parties are spared a second round of litigation over the same wedding.
What falls inside, what stays outside
| Category | Position under Section 27 |
|---|---|
| Gifts presented to the couple at or about the wedding | Squarely covered — the paradigm case of property that “may belong jointly” to both. |
| Wife’s stridhan (jewellery and gifts exclusively hers) | Her absolute property; recoverable independently. Many courts nonetheless address it in HMA proceedings where both sides join issue, but the exclusive-ownership character is not diluted by the forum. |
| Household articles purchased during cohabitation | Contested territory — coverage depends on their connection to the marriage; documentary proof of purchase and source of funds becomes decisive. |
| Immovable property bought years later from earnings | Generally outside Section 27; ordinary civil remedies apply. |
| Property claimed by in-laws or other third parties | Third-party titles cannot be conclusively decided in the matrimonial proceeding; separate proceedings may be unavoidable. |
Building the application properly
Section 27 orders form part of the decree, which means they are executable as decrees — a significant practical advantage over fresh suits. It also means an appeal against the decree can reopen them, so the evidence supporting each item should be trial-grade, not an afterthought annexed to written submissions.
The takeaway
Section 27 rewards the litigant who treats matrimonial property as a case within the case: inventoried early, pleaded precisely, proved with documents and carried into the decree. Used that way, it closes the property chapter with the marriage itself — instead of leaving a trail of suits that outlive the decree by years.
This article is for general information only and is not legal advice or a solicitation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What property does Section 27 cover?
Property presented at or about the time of marriage which may belong jointly to the husband and wife — the wedding corpus: gifts, articles and funds given in connection with the marriage. Courts have taken a practical view of the phrase, but property acquired long after the marriage from independent earnings, or belonging exclusively to third parties, sits outside the provision’s core.
Does Section 27 bar a separate civil suit or stridhan claim?
No. Section 27 is an enabling, summary convenience, not an exhaustive code. A wife’s stridhan — gifts made to her exclusively — remains her absolute property, recoverable through a DV Act application seeking return of stridhan, or a civil action. Choosing the Section 27 route makes sense when an HMA proceeding is already on foot and the property dispute can be resolved on the same record.
When should the Section 27 application be filed?
During the pendency of the HMA proceeding, so that the decree can incorporate the property provisions. Practice favours filing early — with the written statement or soon after — so that disclosure, inventories and evidence on the property question travel with the main trial rather than delaying the decree at the end.
What orders can the court pass?
Such provisions in the decree as the court deems just and proper: return of articles, division, or payment of value. Because the power is tied to the decree, precision matters — a schedule of items with descriptions and values invites an enforceable order; a vague plea for “return of all articles” invites nothing useful.