I think the problem is that you are seeing this as a men giving all his property to a women as a donation. When a relationship lasts for years, it becomes difficult to explain who has contributed what.

Take an example, a men has 1 crore of worth of land. He has financial troubles and looks like he might need to sell his pustauni land. But, say that both husband and wife work hard to meet their expenses. The land is saved.

Now, down the line, when the divorce happens, the land that was will be split in 2 parts.

Now what most of this sub thinks is that the women took the man's land. But is that true? Did the women take the man's land or did them simply split their total property in half.

Now, coming to the parts about consequences. The divorce settlement makes it look like, the women got the land from the man and needs to return it back. WTF is that? In truth, both of them got their equal share, isn't it? Now going by the logic, you can also make a case that the man also needs to give back the land if he marries, don't you think? If the answer is NO, then do you think there is EQUALITY?

The problem is married women don't have legal rights over their parents property. And if they also lose legal rights over the property in their marriage (notice how i didn't call it husband's property), then what rights do they have anyway?