In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court said that daughters will have equal rights to inherit joint Hindu family property as sons. It said that the amended Hindu Succession Act that came in force in 2005 will have retrospective effect.

Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005

The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 came into force on  September 9, 2005. The amendment aims to remove gender discriminatory provisions in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and gives the following rights to daughters under Section 6:

* The daughter of a coparcener cell by birth becomes a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son.

* The daughter has the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son.

* The daughter shall be subject to the same liability in the said coparcenary property as that of a son; and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener.

* The daughter is allotted the same share as is allotted to a son.

* The share of the pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased daughter shall be allotted to the surviving child of such pre-deceased son or of such pre-deceased daughter.

What was the case in SC about?

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 judgment 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.

What are the key points mentioned by the SC?

A daughter is a daughter throughout her life, the top court observed the judgment 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.

Unregistered oral partition, without any contemporaneous public document, cannot be accepted as the statutory recognised mode of partition.

Women’s rights activists welcomed the apex court ruling in favour of equal coparcenary rights for daughters in joint Hindu family property, saying it will help in ensuring their mental and economic empowerment.