Daughters have equal rights over joint Hindu family property: SC
12 Aug 2020 03:11:17
NEW DELHI :
“A daughter always remains a loving daughter. A son is a son until he gets a wife. A daughter is a daughter throughout her life,” the top court observed in a significant judgement
HOLDING that daughters cannot be deprived of their right of equality, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that they will have equal rights to inherit joint Hindu family property as sons, saying the amended Hindu Succession act that came in force in 2005 will have retrospective effect. “A daughter always remains a loving daughter. A son is a son until he gets a wife.
A daughter is a daughter throughout her life,” the top court observed in a significant judgement while upholding the rights of a daughter even if the father died before the enactment of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, S Nazeer and M R Shah said the provisions contained in substituted Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, confer the status of coparcener on the daughter born before or after the amendment in the same manner as a son with the same rights and liabilities. Coparcener is a term used for a person who assumes a legal right in parental property by birth only. The verdict makes it clear that the amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, granting equal rights to daughters to inherit ancestral property would have retrospective effect.
The top court overruled its earlier 2015 decision in which it had originally held that the rights under the amendment are applicable to living daughters of living coparceners as on September 9, 2005, irrespective of when such daughters are born. The judgement on a batch of appeals against the 2015 verdict came on the issue whether the amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, granting equal rights to daughters to inherit ancestral property would have retrospective effect.
“The rights can be claimed by the daughter born earlier with effect from September 9, 2005 with savings as provided in Section 6(1) as to the disposition or alienation, partition or testamentary disposition which had taken place before December 20, 2004. Since the right in coparcenary is by birth, it is not necessary that father coparcener should be living as on September 9, 2005” it said. The apex court, in its 121-page judgement, said the statutory fiction of partition created by proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as originally enacted did not bring about the actual partition or disruption of coparcenary.
“The fiction was only for the purpose of ascertaining share of deceased coparcener when he was survived by a female heir, of Class I as specified in the Schedule to the Act of 1956 or male relative of such female. “The provisions of the substituted S6 are required to be given full effect. Notwithstanding that a preliminary decree has been passed the daughters are to be given share in coparcenary equal to that of a son,” the bench said.