Spouse Over Ascendants: Goa Succession Amendments Survive Article 14 Challenge

The Bombay High Court at Goa has upheld the Goa Succession, Special Notaries and Inventory Proceedings (Amendment) Acts of 2022 and 2023, which reordered intestate succession under the parent Act of 2012 to place the surviving spouse above ascendants. The Division Bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Ashish S. Chavan dismissed Writ Petition No. 81 of 2025 and Writ Petition No. 2486 of 2025, along with the connected intervention applications, by judgment pronounced on 8 May 2026.

Background

The lead petition was filed by a sibling of a person who died intestate on 31 May 2022, leaving immovable properties in Mormugao Taluka. Before the 2022 amendment, where the deceased left no descendants, the estate devolved on ascendants under Section 13 read with Section 52 of the Act of 2012. The Amendment Act of 2022 altered Section 52 to place the surviving spouse after descendants, displacing ascendants in the order of priority. The 2023 Amendment substituted Section 52 again and added an explanation, and also amended Sections 72, 76, 77 and 83. The companion petition (WPST 2486 of 2025) raised cognate grievances.

Grounds of challenge

The petitioners contended that the amendments imposed arbitrary restrictions on the right to bequeath or gift property and were ultra vires the Constitution. They argued that the 2023 Amendment had retrospective effect, taking away vested rights that had already accrued on the date of death, and that this was without nexus, object or purpose, and therefore violative of Article 14. An additional argument concerned the autonomy of parties who had entered into ante-nuptial agreements.

Holding

The Court rejected the Article 14 challenge based on manifest arbitrariness. Examining the change in Section 52 against the backdrop of the Portuguese Civil Code, the Bench held that the legislature had acted in the larger interest of the surviving spouse, who under the Portuguese Civil Code enjoyed a distinct position in marriage and in property shared between spouses. The amendment, the Court observed, advances a principle that has prevailed in Goa since the Portuguese rule, and cannot be characterised as arbitrary.

On retrospectivity, the Bench held that the 2023 Amendment is not retrospective in operation and does not rob parties of rights that are vested and crystallised. The explanation appended to Section 52 clarifies that crystallised rights are not disturbed, and that only rights which remain open in pending proceedings before the Court will be governed by the amending Act.

On the ante-nuptial agreement argument, the Court held that while parties remain governed by their contract during the subsistence of the marriage, on the death of one spouse the survivor inherits in accordance with the Act of 2012, without discrimination.

Practical takeaway

In Goa, for successions opening after the amendments come into force and for proceedings still pending, the surviving spouse now ranks above ascendants, but inheritances that had already vested before the amendments remain protected by the explanation to Section 52.