LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

rajendran123 (student)     22 April 2009

Hindu succession Act 1956 , Amendment section 6

 

Hi I have a question; I will appreciate if someone can give me the exact picture.
X had 4 sons and 3 daughters, all married before 1980 and 'X' executed a registered will in 1982 that his share in the coparcenary property shall devolve on his 4 sons in equal shares after his death and 'X' died in 1983 and the property was devolved on his 4 sons as per the registered will and there are holding the property jointly (All the properties are situated in Andhra Pradesh). 
In 1985 the Govt of AP passed an amendment to Hindu succession act 1956 ( Section 29A ), that equal rights to daughter’s in the coparcenary property with a rider that daughters married prior to the amendment are not entitled above rights. As such the 3 daughters were not entitled any share in the coparcenary property in Andhra Pradesh. While, Govt of India introducing a similar amendment to section 6 of the Hindu succession act 1956 in 2005 in a form of bill in rajya sabha, has stated that “Provided that nothing contained in the sub-section shall apply to a daughter married before the commencement of Hindu succession (amendment act 2004).However, in the final amendment act the above clause was not included.
In this situation, the question is whether the married daughters have got any share in the coparcenary property or not?
One view is as per amendment to section 6 “ On and from the commencement of Hindu succession act 2005 in a joint family governed by mitakshara law, the daughter of a coparcener (a) by birth becomes a coparcener in her own right . The necessary and sufficient condition is that the daughter must be a member of a joint family and daughter of a coparcener. It is a well known fact that married daughters were not a member of joint family. Secondly, coparcener was not alive on the commencement of act.
As both the conditions are not satisfied the daughter’s are not benefited by the amendment. In this connection I request your considered views.Please advice.
 
 


Learning

 3 Replies

Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate )     23 April 2009

 Dear  Rajendran !

I am of the view that by Amendment Act the daughters were married and they were not entitled to  rshare under 1984  AP amendment Act 

By the date of Amendment  in 2005 to Sec 6  the proerty was whther devided or not between the brothers  is not mentioned  . However the Share  of the Father was diverted  by Will Deed and the brothers acquired Father sharte also in the year 2003 on the dat eof death of father  . In the year 1983 the Will Came in to force and by that time the dauthers were not  enttield . The events took place /disposal/transfer  by father acted up on / came in to force in 1983 . So the share of the Father is not availbel to daughters even as per Sec 8

The details regardign the partition / sales by brothers after 1983 beofre 20-4-2004 are not mentioned by you .

Your are required to  mention the said details for further consideration and discussions

with reagrds !

1 Like

rajendran123 (student)     23 April 2009

Thank you for your reply.In continuation of the above issue, the dwelling house was divided among brothers by registered partition deed in  2006 june.However, the lands are divided and separate passbook were obtained( family arrangement  / oral partion ). In this connection please advise weather the daughters are eligible for any share in the agricultural lands and houses.

Y V Vishweshwar Rao (Advocate )     23 April 2009

1-When the Pattedar Pss Books are issued date / years  !

2- Whether  Regd Partition Deed  of  2006 with in it , has reference  of any  earlier date of Settled  for partition i.e Partition effected  on ---------10-2004 or in the year /9 /2004  and beign registered in the year 2006 so  !


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Related Threads


Loading