By Snehil Sharma–
Introduction
The Supreme Court of India passed a judgement recently on 11th August, 2020 and held that equal property rights should be provided to the daughters as they are entitled to it. The same will be applicable upon those daughters as well who are born after the amendment of 2005 which was made to Hindu Succession Act of 1956[1].
The three judge bench consisting of S. Abdul Nazeer, MR Shah & Arun Mishra passed this landmark judgement stating that right of coparcenary is a daughter’s vested right, which begins from the time of her birth. Regardless of her father coparcener being alive or dead before 9th September, 2005.
Now, every daughter can claim equal property rights as per Hindu Succession Act even if the coparcener father died before the introduction of the 2005 amendment. The court gave this judgement by overruling the observation which was made in the case of Mangammal vs TB Raju & Prakash vs Phulavati.
View of Schools of Hindu Law Regarding Coparcenary.
In schools such as Mitakshara & Dayabhaga, patriarchy system has always prevailed in which women were not entitled for any share in the property of family.
As per Mitakshara School of law, son has a birth right for acquiring interest and rights regarding family property. Female has not been considered as member of coparcenary within Mitakshara. However, Dayabhaga school provides such rights to son after death of his father but the scenario regarding daughters remain the same.
Equality enshrined within Constitution of India
The framers gave appropriate emphasis on the adverse & inferior position of women within Indian society while framing the Constitution and was committed towards ensuring that they shall be provided equal right and equal status in the society. Art. 14, 15 & 16 ensures prevention of discrimination & provides powers to state to make legislations to safeguard interests of female members of Indian society.
Historical Development of Daughters’ Rights through Judgements
The right to property vested with the Hindu women has always been a highlighted topic and a matter of concern for state especially after the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005 was introduced. In the earlier times, no codified personal laws regarding Hindus were available. This led to the introduction of Hindu Succession Act on 17th June, 1956 which was supposed to deal with intestate succession of Hindus.
However, the daughters of Hindu families had not been ensured their rights in the family property. There have been various instances where this issue has been raised before the Indian Courts and courts have considered the same through passing decisions which have laid the foundation stones for the entitlement of daughters in the ancestral property of her father[2].
The Indian Courts through series of landmark judgments have created an ideal and appropriate view which is much clearer and will eventually be successful in providing the daughters their vested rights equivalent to the sons within the Hindu family. The series of judgments can be understood through the following:
- Prakash v. Phulavati Case (2016)[3]:
Phulavati, whose father passed away in the year 1988 approached the court seeking partition and individual possession upon one-seventh part of the ancestral property of her father.
Issues: The issue raised before the Supreme Court was that can the Amendment Act be applied retrospectively and such issue was subject to the positions which was conflicting and divergent to the previous judgments passed by the various High Courts.
Judgement: In the year 2016, the Supreme Court of India held that only those coparcener fathers who were alive as on 9th September, 2005 will be able to entitle their daughters for the share of ancestral property. However, this judgment even after addressing the issues of daughters, was not able to make a clear distinction and seemed flawed as it created confusion which was unnecessary[4]. The reason & explanations provided within the case was accurate enough. However, the conclusion provided by the court was in contravention to the reasoning which was provided.
- Damanna @ Suman Surpur Vs. Amar (2018)[5]
Issue: This case was also concerned with interpretation of section 6 of HSA,1956 and amendment Act of 2005 and raised the issue that whether a daughter whose father passed away in year 2001 can be entitled to get share in the ancestral property or not[6].
Judgment: In the year 2018, the division bench of SC in Damanna case held that woman becomes coparcener by the very factum when she takes birth considering the requisite provided under amendment of 2005 as irrelevant. Although, the view of court in this case seems more accurate, the court did not overrule or dissent from the decision of Prakash case.
- Mangammal v. T.B. Raju (2018)[7]
Issue: The issue raised in this case was that whether the daughters can still be considered as coparceners in they are born before the enactment of HSA,1956. The daughters in this case were seeking 1/15th of the ancestral property of their father.
Judgment: In this case the finding of the Prakash case was again reiterated by the court and it held that amendment of the year 2005 cannot be applied in a retrospective manner. Later, the aggrieved appellants approached SC of India by filing Special Leave Petition as per article 136 of Indian Constitution.
Hence, it can be easily perceived from the above mentioned judgements that the Courts were having distinctive opinions regarding the interpretation of the amendment which was introduced in the year 2005 and such distinctive opinions in the judgments fueled a debate concerning daughter’s vested right in the property.
Judgment of 2020
Finally, on August 11 2020, the court while deciding the case of Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma dealt with the lack of clarity concerning the sections amended which was due to the conflicting judgements in the past.
The court held that Hindu women will be entitled to have their share in the ancestral coparcenary property of their fathers. The court clarified its view regarding the coparcenary rights of daughters which were subjected to unjustified restrictions in the past. The controversy was finally abolished by the court, by stating that such restrictions were not appropriately backed by any logic and reasonableness and have been creating unnecessary confusion since long[8].
Hence, it was finally concluded that Hindu women will be considered coparceners irrespective of the date of their birth along with date of birth/death of their father and will be ensuing all the rights of a coparcener without any unreasonable restrictions.
Conclusion
This judgement provided by the court will be going a long way as far as promotion of gender equality is concerned and will eventually create a significant impact over other litigations which are pending before the court in context to this matter. The position of daughters has been specifically justified and they will not be treated on a distinct footing from the son anymore in Hindu families.
[1] Daughter to Have Full Right in Parental Property Under Amended Hindu Succession Act, Decrees SC – India Legal. [online] India Legal. Available at: <https://www.indialegallive.com/constitutional-law-news/courts-news/daughter-to-have-full-right-in-parental-property-under-amended-hindu-succession-act-decrees-sc>.
[2] Feba Nisha, 2020. Want to Stay Updated and Ahead of the Curve? Tune in to Apprentice Insights. [online] Theapprentice.in. Available at: <https://theapprentice.in/blog/litigation/80/retrospective-effect-of-hindu-women%E2%80%99s-right-as-a-coparcener>.
[3] (2016) 2 SCC 36
[4] Radhika Agrawal, 2020. Supreme Court Clears the Air On Daughter’s Right in Coparcenary Property | Lexology. [online] Lexology.com. Available at: <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ee764b32-4cc8-4e75-9839-70fbf0966a16>.
[5] (2018) 3 SCC 343
[6] Rana, 2020. SC Clears That Women Born Before Hindu Succession Act (2005) Also Have Ancestral Rights – Family and Matrimonial – India. [online] Mondaq.com. Available at: <https://www.mondaq.com/india/wills-intestacy-estate-planning/686298/sc-clears-that-women-born-before-hindu-succession-act-2005-also-have-ancestral-rights>.
[7] (2018) SCC Online SC 422
[8] Manini Menon, 2020. Supreme Court Observer – Court Clarifies Application of S.6 Of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. [online] Scobserver.in. Available at: <https://www.scobserver.in/the-desk/court-clarifies-application-of-s-6-of-hindu-succession-act-1956>.