Coparcenary in India - It's Past, Present and Future - Academike

1/30/2016
CoparcenaryinIndia:ItsPast,PresentandFutureAcademike
ACADEMIKE
Lawctopus' Law Journal + Knowledge Center (ISSN: 2349-9796)
ABOUT
SUBMISSIONS
ISSUES
ADVISORS
STUDENT EDITORS
CONTACT
Coparcenary in India: Its Past, Present

and Future
February3,2015byamoolya LeaveaComment
JasleenKaurDua
ArmyInstituteofLaw,Mohali
Editors Note: The author looks at the past, present and future of the concept of
CoparcenaryinIndia.
INTRODUCTION:
CoparcenaryowesitsorigintotheconceptofDayai.e.propertywhichhasbeenexplained
by Vijnaneshwara while commenting on Yajnavalkyasmriti in the Daya vibhaga prakranam
vayavahara adhaya. Here, it was discussed by the Vijnaneshwara that Daya is only that
property which becomes the property of another person, solely by reason of relation to the
owner.Thewordssolelybyreasonofrelationexcludeanyothercause,suchaspurchase.
Narada also approves the meaning of the Daya which is a coparcenary property because
according to him, sons can divide only fathers property which has been approved by the
http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/coparcenaryindiapastpresentfuture/
1/23
1/30/2016
learned.
Therefore,theuniqueconceptofcoparcenaryistheproductofancientHindujurisprudence
whichlateronbecametheessentialfeatureofHindulawingeneralandMitaksharaSchool
ofHindulawinparticular.
Theessenceofcoparcenaryisunityofownershipwiththenecessaryappendageofunityof
possession.Nocoparcenarycancommencewithoutacommonmaleancestor,thoughafter
hisdeathitmayconsistofcollateralssuchasbrothers,uncles,cousinsnephewsetc.Itisa
purelyafeatureoflawandcannotbecreatedbyacontract.However,anadoptedsonmay
be introduced as a member of the coparcenary. Once the common ancestor dies, the
coparcenaryofthebrotherscanbecreated.[1]
THETWOSCHOOLSOFHINDULAW:
ThecodifiedHindulawlaysdownuniformlawsforalltheHindusinthesociety.Itleavesno
scopefortheexistenceoftwoschoolsofHinduLawinthecodifiedlaws.Theirrelevancelies
onlyinthoseareasinwhichthereisnodefinedandcodifiedlaw.Itwasintheeraofdigests
andcommentariesthattheseschoolsoriginatedin.
1.MitaksharaSchool
2.DayabhagaSchool
3.Mithakshara School: This school owes its name to Vijnanaeshwaras commentary on
theYajnavalkyasmritibythenameofMitakshara.Thisschoolprevailsinthewholeof
IndiaexceptAssamandBengal.[2]Thisinspiteofbeingarunningcommentaryisalso
a digest of practically all the leading Smritis and the deals with all the titles of Hindu
law. The date of composition is placed by Kane from A.D. 11001200. The word
Mitaksharaliterallymeansabriefcompendium.
The mitakshara School follows the law of inheritance based on the Principle of Propinquity
i.e. on the nearness of blood relationship. However, full effect to this was not given. The
HinduSuccessionAct1956hasgivenfulleffecttothesameprinciple.
Doctrineofsurvivorship: the property after the death of the common ancestor devolves by
thesurvivor.Thesonsofthefamilyhaveabirthrightinthepropertybyvirtueofthefollowing
tworules:
2/23
1/30/2016
Femaleswillnotinherit.
Agnatestobepreferredovercognates.
TheseruleshavemadetheMitaksharaSchoolreactionary.
TherearefourSubSchoolsundertheMitaksharaSchool:
1.Dravidian School of thought (Madras school): It exists in South India. In the case of
adoption by a widow it has a peculiar custom that the consent of the sapindas was
necessaryforavalidadoption.(Sapindasbloodrelation)
CollectorofMaduravs.MootooRamalingaSethupathy(Ramnadcase)[3]:Thezaminderof
Ramnad died any without sons and usually, such state would have escheated to the
Government, his widow however adopted a son, with the consent of the sapindas of her
husband.
But on the death of the widow, the Collector of Madhura notified that the Zamindari would
escheat to the State. The adopted son brought a suit for declaration of the validity of the
adoption. The question was that whether a widow can make a valid adoption without her
husbandsconsentbuthissapindasconsent.
ThePrivyCouncil,aftertracingtheevolutionofthevariousSchoolsofHindulaw,heldthat
Hindulawshouldbeadministeredfromclearproofofusagewhichwilloutweighthewritten
text of law. Based on the Smriti Chandrika and Prasara Madhviya, the Privy Council
concludedthatintheDravidaSchool,intheabsenseofauthorityfromthehusband,awidow
mayadoptasonwiththeassentofhiskindred.
1.MAHARASHTRASCHOOL:(BOMBAYSCHOOLOFTHOUGHT):ItexistsinBombay,
fromtheabovefourbases,therearetwomorebases.TheyareVyavakara,Mayukha
andNimayaSindhu.TheBombayschoolhasgotanentireworkofreligiousandCivil
laws.
BANARASSCHOOLOFTHOUGHT:ItexistsinOrissaandBihar.
1.MITHILA SCHOOL OF THOUGHT: It exists in Uttar Pradesh near the Jamuna river
areas. Apart from the above schools, there are four more schools which are now
existenttoday.TheyareVyavakara,MayukhaNimayaandSindhuSchools.
3/23
1/30/2016
2.DayabhagaSchool:thisschoolisconsideredtobethedissidentschooloftheBenaras
School. Benaras has been the seal of the Brahmana learning and the citadel of
Brahmin orthodoxy and conservatism. The Bengal school propagated a number of
enlightened theories and doctrines. This school owes its origin to Jimutavahanas
digestonleadingSmritisbythenameofDayabhaga.ThisSchoolisprevalentinAssam
and Bengal.[4]Kane places the date of composition of Jimutvahanas literary career
from10901130A.D[5].
Thisschoolisbasedontheprincipleofreligiousefficacyorspiritualbenefit.Theoneswho
confer more spiritual benefit is entitled to inherit the property in comparison to those who
conferlessspiritualbenefit[6]basedontheDoctrineofOblations.Thefemalesinthefamily
mayalsoinherittheproperty.AccordingtothisSchool,thesonsdonothaveabirthrightto
theproperty.Intheeventofthecoparcenerdyingissuless,hiswidowhasarighttosucceed
tohisshareandtoenforceapartitiononherownaccount.[7]
ThedifferencebetweentheMitaksharaSchoolandtheDayabhageSchoolis:
Inrespectoflawofsuccession.
Inrespectofjointfamily.
ConceptofCoparcenary:
HinduCoparcenaryandHinduJointFamily:
Coparcenary is unity of title, possession and interest. Hindu Coparcenary is a much
narrowerbodythanaHindujointfamilyitincludesonlythosepersonswhoacquirebybirth
an interest in the coparcenary property, they being the sons, grandsons, and great
grandsonsoftheholdersofthepropertyforthetimebeing.
Coparecenary: The Blacks law dictionary gives a more comprehensive explanation of the
term coparcenary. It says, such estate arises where several take by descent from same
ancestorasoneheir,allcoparcenersconstitutingbutoneheirandhavingbutoneestateand
beingconnectedbyunityofinterestandoftitle.Aspeciesofestate,ortenancy,whichexists
where lands of inheritance descend from the ancestor to two or more persons. It arose in
England either by common law or particular custom. By common law, as where a person,
seized in fee simple or feetail, dies, and his next heirs are two or more females, his
daughters, sisters, aunts, cousins, or their representatives in this case they all inherit, and
4/23
1/30/2016
these coheirs, are then called coparceners, or, for brevity parceners only. By particular
custom,aswherelandsdescend,asingavelkind,toallthematesinequaldegree,assons,
brothers, uncles etcAn estate which several persons hold as one heir, whether male or
female.Thisestatehasthethreeunitiesoftime,titleandpossessionbuttheinterestsofthe
coparcenersmaybeunequal.[8]
The Dharamasastra and coparcenary: In Dharmasastra coparceners are referred to as
Sahadaee. The term coparceners came to be used as a result of influence of Western
Jurisprudence.Therefore,thepresentconceptisnotverydifficultfromtheearlierone.The
justification of coparcenary according to the Dayabhaga School is that those who can offer
funeraloblations(Pindhdaan)areentitledtotheproperty.TheconceptofPindhdaanisthat
thepersonwhooffersfuneraloblationssharethesamebloodwiththepersontowhomheis
offering a Pindh. A coparcenary is purely a creation of law it cannot be created by act of
parties, except by adoption. In order to be able to claim a partition, it does not matter how
remote from the common ancestor a person may be, provided he is not more than four
degreesremovedfromthelastmaleownerwhohashimselftakenaninterestbybirth.[9]
HinduLawofSuccession:anypartoftheHindulawwhichisyetuncodifiedisgovernedby
thetwoSchoolsi.e.theMitaksharaandtheDayabhaga.AccordingtotheMitaksharaSchool,
there is unity of ownership no person has a definite share as his interest is always
fluctuating with the births and deaths in the family. The whole body of coparceners is the
owner. There is unity of possession and enjoyment. Further, while the family is joint and
some coparceners have children and others have few or none or some are absent, they
cannotcomplainatthetimeofpartitionaboutsomecoparcenershavingexhaustedthewhole
incomeandcannotaskforanaccountofpastincomeandexpenditure.Katyayanaexpressly
states that the joint family property devolves by survivorship that is on the death of a
coparcenerhisinterestlapsesandgoestotheothercoparceners.
The difference between Mitakshara and Dayabhaga Schools conception of coparcenary:
TheconceptionofcoparcenaryundertheDayabhagaSchoolisentirelydifferentfromthatof
the Mitakshara School. Under the Dayabhaga School, sons do not acquire any interest by
birthinancestralproperty,butthesonsrightarisesonlyonthefathersdeathandthesons
takepropertyasheirsandnotassurvivors.
However,thecoparcenaryinHindulawisnotidenticaltothecoparcenaryasunderstoodin
English law. Thus, in the case of death of a member of coparcenary under the Mitakshara
law,hisinterestdevolvesontheothermembersbysurvivorshipwhileunderEnglishlaw,if
5/23
1/30/2016
oneofthecoheirsjointlyinheritingpropertiesdies,hisorherrightgoestohisorherlegal
heirs.
COPARCENARYTHEPAST:
In Hindu social system, Dharmasastras do not separate the spiritual from the secular,
therefore, in the grasthasrama a person is given the training to lead a complete and
meaningfullifeforthebenefitandwelfareofthosewholeftandthosewhoarepresentand
thosewhowillbeborn.ItisauniquephenomenonofHinduphilosophythattheHindufamily
has been thought of as one of the most important institutions because all other institutions
like brahmacharya, vanaprastha and sanyasha depend on it. Hence, the importance of the
familyisadvocatedintheDharmasastras.
Origin of coparcenary: The coparcenary as understood in Hindu law has its origin in the
concept of Daya as explained by Vijnaneshwara while commenting on Yajnavalkyasmriti in
theDayavibhagaprakranamvayavaharaadhaya.Here,VijnaneshwaradiscussedthatDaya
is only that property which becomes the property of another person, solely by reason of
relationtotheowner.Thewordssolelybyreasonofrelationexcludeanyothercause,such
aspurchaseorthelike.
Narada also approves the meaning of the Daya which is a coparcenary property because
according to him, sons can divide only fathers property which has been approved by the
learned(Svatvanimitasambandhopalashanam).
Therefore,theuniqueconceptofcoparcenaryistheproductofancientHindujurisprudence
whichlateronbecametheessentialfeatureofHindulawingeneralandMitaksharaSchool
ofHindulawinparticular.[10]
Position Of Women (In Regards To Property Rights) Prior To Enactment Of Hindu
SuccessionAct,1956
Sincetimeimmemorialtheframingofallpropertylawshavebeenexclusivelyforthebenefit
ofmanandwomanhasbeentreatedassubservient,anddependentonmalesupport.The
righttopropertyisimportantforthefreedomanddevelopmentofahumanbeing.Priortothe
Act of 1956, Shastric and Customary laws, which varied from region to region, governed
Hindusandsometimesitvariedinthesameregiononacastebasis.Asthecountryisvast
andcommunicationsandsocialinteractionsinthepastweredifficult,itledtodiversityinthe
6/23
1/30/2016
law. Consequently in matters of succession also, there were different schools, like
DayabhagainBengalandtheadjoiningareasMayukhainBombay,KonkanandGujaratand
arumakkattayam or Nambudri in Kerala and Mitakshara in other parts of India with slight
variations.ThemultiplicityofsuccessionlawsinIndia,diverseintheirnature,owingtotheir
variedoriginmadethepropertylawsevenmerecomplex.
Issueofgenderdiscrimination:
But, however the social reform movement during the preindependence period raised the
issue of gender discrimination and a number of ameliorative steps were initiated. The
principalreformthatwascalledfor,andonewhichbecameapressingnecessityinviewof
changedsocialandeconomicconditions,wasthatinsuccessionthereshouldbeequitable
distributionbetweenmaleandfemaleheirsandtheHinduwomenslimitedestateshouldbe
enlargedintofullownership(howeverthatactuallyneverhappened).
PriortoHinduLawofInheritanceAct,1929
PriortothisAct,theMitaksharalawalsorecognizesinheritancebysuccessionbutonlytothe
propertyseparatelyownedbyanindividual,maleorfemale.Femalesareincludedasheirsto
thiskindofpropertyby Mitaksharalaw.Before theHinduLaw of InheritanceAct1929,the
Bengal,BenaresandMithilasubschoolsofMitakshararecognizedonlyfivefemalerelations
as being entitled to inherit namely widow, daughter, mother paternal grandmother, and
paternalgreatgrandmother.TheMadrassubschoolrecognizedtheheritablecapacityofa
larger number of females heirs that is of the sons daughter, daughters daughter and the
sister,asheirswhoareexpresslynamedasheirsinHinduLawofInheritanceAct,1929.The
sonsdaughterandthedaughtersdaughterrankedasbandhusinBombayandMadras.The
Bombayschoolwhichismostliberaltowomen,recognizedanumberofotherfemaleheirs
includingahalfsister,fatherssisterandwomenmarriedintothefamilysuchasstepmother,
sonswidow,brotherswidowandalsomanyotherfemalesclassifiedasbandhus.
HinduLawofInheritanceAct,1929
This was the earliest piece of legislation, bringing woman into the scheme of inheritance.
This Act, conferred inheritance rights on three female heirs i.e. sons daughter, daughters
daughterandsister.
HinduWomensRighttoPropertyAct(XVIIIof),1937
7/23
1/30/2016
This was the landmark legislation conferring ownership rights on women. This Act brought
aboutrevolutionarychangesintheHinduLawofallschools,andbroughtchangesnotonlyin
thelawofcoparcenarybutalsointhelawofpartition,alienationofproperty,inheritanceand
adoption.TheActof1937enabledthewidowtosucceedalongwiththesonandtotakea
shareequaltothatoftheson.But,thewidowdidnotbecomeacoparcenereventhoughshe
possessed a right akin to a coparcenary interest in the property and was a member of the
jointfamily.Thewidowwasentitledonlytoalimitedestateinthepropertyofthedeceased
witharighttoclaimpartition.Adaughterhadvirtuallynoinheritancerights.
Despite these enactments having brought important changes in the law of succession by
conferring new rights of succession on certain females, these were still found to be
incoherentanddefectiveinmanyrespectsandgaverisetoanumberofanomaliesandleft
untouchedthebasicfeaturesofdiscriminationagainstwomen.Theseenactmentsnowstand
repealed.
ConstitutionalProvisionsensuringGenderEquality
TheframersoftheIndianConstitutiontooknoteoftheadverseconditionofwomeninsociety
and a number of provisions and safeguards were included in the Constitution to ward off
genderinequality.Inthiscontext,Articles14[11],15(3)[12]and16[13]oftheConstitutioncan
be mentioned. These provisions are part of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the
Constitution.PartIVoftheconstitutioncontainingDirectivePrinciplesofStatePolicy,which
arenolessfundamentalinthegovernanceoftheStatetoensureequalitybetweenmanand
womansuchasequalpayforequalwork.
Despite these provisions for ensuring equal status, unfortunately a woman is still not only
neglectedinherownnatalfamilybutalsothefamilyshemarriesintobecauseofcertainlaws
andattitudes.
THEPRESENTOFCOPARCENARYININDIA:
Changeisthelawoflife.Andthosewholookonlytothepastorpresentarecertaintomiss
thefuture.
JohnF.Kennedy
TheconceptofcoparcenarywasintroducedintheancientIndia.Overtheperiodofyearsthe
8/23
1/30/2016
circumstances changed, and with the need of the hour Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which
was again amended in 2005. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, amended
Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, allowing daughters of the deceased equal
rightswithsons.Inthecaseofcoparcenaryproperty,oracaseinwhichtwopeopleinherit
propertyequallybetweenthem,thedaughterandsonaresubjecttothesameliabilitiesand
disabilities.Theamendmentessentiallyfurthersequalrightsbetweenmalesandfemalesin
thelegalsystem.
PositionofWomenafterEnactmentOfHinduSuccessionAct,1956
After the advent of the Constitution, the first law made at the central level pertaining to
propertyandinheritanceconcerningHinduswastheHinduSuccessionAct,1956.ThisAct
dealing with intestate succession among Hindus came into force on 17th June 1956. It
brought about changes in the law of succession and gave rights, which were hitherto
unknown,inrelationtoawomansproperty.Thesection6[14]ofHinduSuccessionAct,1956
wasamendedin2005.
However,section6didnotinterferewiththespecialrightsofthosewhoaremembersofa
Mitaksharacoparcenaryexcepttoproviderulesfordevolutionoftheinterestofadeceasedin
certain cases. The Act lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of inheritance and
applies, interalia, to persons governed by Mitakshara and Dayabhaga Schools as also to
those in certain parts of southern India who were previously governed by the
Murumakkattayam,AliyasantanaandNambudriSystems.TheActappliestoanypersonwho
isaHinduasdefinedinsection2ofHinduSuccessionAct,1956[15].Butnowthequestion
the question is whether, the Hindu Succession Act actually gave women an equal right to
propertyordiditonlyprofesstodoso.
The retention of the Mitakshara coparcenary without including females in it meant that
females couldnt inherit ancestral property as males do. If a joint family gets divided, each
malecoparcenertakeshisshareandfemalesgetnothing.Onlywhenoneofthecoparceners
dies, a female gets a share of his share as an heir to the deceased. Thus the law by
excluding the daughters from participating in coparcenary ownership (merely by reason of
theirsex)notonlycontributedtoaninequityagainstfemalesbuthasledtooppressionand
negation of their right to equality and appears to be a mockery of the fundamental rights
guaranteedbytheConstitution.
Hence this very fact necessitated a further change in regards to the property rights of
women,andwhichwasdonebytheHinduSuccession(Amendment)Act,2005.
9/23
1/30/2016
RightsconferreduponwomenbytheHinduSuccessionAct,2005:(SpecificallyFocusingOn
Section6)
Outofmanysignificantbenefitsbroughtinforwomen,oneofthesignificantbenefithasbeen
tomakewomencoparcenary(rightbybirth)inMitaksharajointfamilyproperty.
Earlier the female heir only had a deceased mans notional portion. With this
amendment,bothmaleandfemalewillgetequalrights.Inamajorblowtopatriarchy,
centuriesold customary Hindu law in the shape of the exclusive male mitakshara
coparcenaryhasbeenbreachedthroughoutthecountry.Thepreferentialrightbybirth
ofsonsinjointfamilyproperty,withtheofferingofshradhaforthespiritualbenefitand
solaceofancestors,hasforcenturiesbeenconsideredsacredandinviolate.Ithasalso
played a major role in the blatant preference for sons in Indian society. This
amendment,inonefellswoop,hasmadethedaughteramemberofthecoparcenary
andisasignificantadvancementtowardsgenderequality.
Thesignificantchangeofmakingalldaughters(includingmarriedones)coparcenersin
joint family property has been of great importance for women, both economically and
symbolically.Economically,itcanenhancewomenssecurity,bygivingthembirthrights
in property that cannot be willed away by men. In a malebiased society where wills
oftendisinheritwomen,thisisasubstantialgain.
Womencanbecomekartasoftheproperty.Symbolically,allthissignalsthatdaughters
and sons are equally important members of the parental family. It undermines the
notion that after marriage the daughter belongs only to her husbands family. If her
marriagebreaksdown,shecannowreturntoherbirthhomebyright,andnotonthe
sufferanceofrelatives.Thiswillenhanceherselfconfidenceandsocialworthandgive
hergreaterbargainingpowerforherselfandherchildren,inbothparentalandmarital
families.
Nowundertheamendment,daughterswillnowgetashareequaltothatofsonsatthe
timeofthenotionalpartition,justbeforethedeathofthefather,andanequalshareof
the fathers separate share. Equal distribution of undivided interests in coparcenery
property. However, the position of the mother regarding the coparcenary stays the
same.She,notbeingamemberofthecoparcenary,willnotgetashareatthetimeof
thenotionalpartition.Themotherwillbeentitledtoanequalsharefromtheseparate
share of the father computed at the time of the notional partition. In effect, the actual
shareofthemotherwillgodown,astheseparateshareofthefatherwillbelessasthe
propertywillnowbeequallydividedbetweenfather,sonsanddaughtersinthenotional
partition.
10/23
1/30/2016
TheextentoftheamendmentAct,2005:itextendstheequalcoparcenaryrighttoadaughter
born into a family right from her birth, it will have a retrospective effect. However, the
amendmentact2005isnotretrospectiveinnatureforthefollowingreasons:
Theopeningthesection6[16]oftheActstatesOnandfromthecommencementofthe
HinduSuccession(amendment)Act,2005.
It has the condition that it will have no application in case where any disposition or
alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property had taken
placebefore20.12.2004.
Thus to get the benefit as per the amended Act, the following conditions need to be
satisfied:
1.Sheshouldhavebeenbornintothefamily.
2.Theundividedcoparcenarypropertymustexiston20.12.2004.
3.Partitionofthepropertyoughtnottohavetakenplacepriorto20.12.2004.
Ifanyoftheabovethreeconditionsarenotsatisfiedthenthebenefitundertheamendedact
willnotbeavailable.
THEFUTUREOFCOPARCENARY:
Wehaveindeedcomefarawayfromwherewestartedandyet,thereisalotthatneedstobe
done. Despite the enactment of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 the law still
has some anomalies. The future of coparcenary lies in the moving further ahead and
improvingthepositionofwomenbygivingeffecttothesolutionstothefollowinganomaliesin
theHinduSuccessionAct,1956.
SomeAnomaliesThatStillPersist:
MakingdaughterscoparcenerswilldecreasethesharesofotherClassIfemaleheirs,
such as the deceaseds widow and mother, since the coparcenary share of the
deceased male from whom they inherit will decline. In States where the wife takes a
share on partition, as in Maharashtra, the widows potential share will now equal the
sonsanddaughters.Butwherethewifetakesnoshareonpartition,asinTamilNadu
orAndhraPradesh,thewidowspotentialsharewillfallbelowthedaughters.
Coparcenary remains a primary entitlement of males the law, no doubt provides for
equaldivisionofthemalecoparcenersshareonhisdeathbetweenallheirs,maleand
11/23
1/30/2016
femalestill,thelawputsthemaleheirsonahigherfootingbyprovidingthattheyshall
inheritanadditionalindependentshareincoparcenarypropertyoverandabovewhat
they inherit equally with female heirs the very concept of coparcenary is that of an
exclusivemalemembershipclub.
Partiallyrestrictingtherighttowill.SuchrestrictionsarecommoninseveralEuropean
countries.Otherwisewomenmayinheritlittle,aswillsoftendisinheritthem.However,
since the 2005 Act does not touch testamentary freedom, retaining the Mitaksara
system and making daughters coparceners, while not the ideal solution, at least
provideswomenassuredsharesinjointfamilyproperty.
IfaHindufemalediesintestate,herpropertydevolvesfirsttohusbandsheirs,thento
husbands fathers heirs and finally only to mothers heirs thus the intestate Hindu
femalepropertyiskeptwithinthehusbandslien.
CONCLUSION
The law regarding the coparcenary in the joint Hindu family has evolved over time. Before
independence various legislations were passed regarding coparcenary. The main change
that has been brought after the independence was in 2005 when the Hindu Succession
(Amendment)Act,2005wasenacted.ThisactchangedthefaceoftheHinduSuccessionAct
by giving equal rights to women as that of the men. The women too can now be the
coparceners.
It is necessary to understand that if equality exists only as a phenomenon outside the
awarenessandapprovalofthemajorityofthepeople,itcannotberealizedbyasectionof
women socialized in traditions of inequality. Thus there is need to create social awareness
andtoeducatepeopletochangetheirattitudetowardstheconceptofgenderequality.The
need of the hour is also to focus attention on changing the social attitudes in favour of
equalityforallbyenactingauniformlaw.
The difficult question of implementing the 2005 Act remains. Campaigns for legal literacy
efforts to enhance social awareness of the advantages to the whole family if women own
propertyandlegalandsocialaidforwomenseekingtoasserttheirrights,areonlyafewof
themanystepsneededtofulfillthechangeincorporatedintheAct.
EditedbyAmoolyaKhurana
[1]HinduLaw,ANSen,SriSaiLawPublications,2008ed.
12/23
1/30/2016
[2]Rohanv.Lachuman,1976Pat,286
[3](1940)1MLJ400
[4]Supranote2
[5]Kane,(2nded.)at609and709
[6]Lexisnexisstudentseries,familylawlectures,seconded.2007,lexisnexisbutterworth
wadhwa,poonampradhansaxena,pg.49
[7]RamDulariv.BatulBibiAIR1976All135
[8]JosephR.Nolanetal.,BlacksLawDictionary,6thed.1990,p.335
[9]P.V.Kane,HistoryofDharmasastra,Vol.III,3rded.1993,p.591.VideMorov.Ganesh,
10 Bm. HCR, p. 444 where Mr. Justice Nanbhai Haridas very lucidly explains by several
diagramsthelimitsofacoparcenaryandw
hatpersonsareentitledtodemandapartitionandfromwhom.
[10]4NLR20082009Pg124
[11] Article 14 in The Constitution of India: Equality before law The State shall not deny to
anypersonequalitybeforethelawortheequalprotectionofthelawswithintheterritoryof
IndiaProhibitionofdiscriminationongroundsofreligion,race,caste,sexorplaceofbirth.
[12]Article15(3)inTheConstitutionOfIndia1949
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for
womenandchildren
[13] Article 16 in The Constitution Of India: Equality of opportunity in matters of public
employment
(1)Thereshallbeequalityofopportunityforallcitizensinmattersrelatingtoemploymentor
appointmenttoanyofficeundertheState
13/23
1/30/2016
(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth,
residence or any of them, be ineligible for, or discriminated against in respect or, any
employmentorofficeundertheState
(3)NothinginthisarticleshallpreventParliamentfrommakinganylawprescribing,inregard
toaclassorclassesofemploymentorappointmenttoanofficeundertheGovernmentof,or
anylocalorotherauthoritywithin,aStateorUnionterritory,anyrequirementastoresidence
withinthatStateorUnionterritorypriortosuchemploymentorappointment
(4) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any provision for the
reservationofappointmentsorpostsinfavorofanybackwardclassofcitizenswhich,inthe
opinionoftheState,isnotadequatelyrepresentedintheservicesundertheState
(5) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any law which provides that the
incumbent of an office in connection with the affairs of any religious or denominational
institution or any member of the governing body thereof shall be a person professing a
particularreligionorbelongingtoaparticulardenomination.
[14]Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Devolution of interest in coparcenary
property:WhenamaleHindudiesafterthecommencementofthisAct,havingatthetimeof
hisdeathaninterestinaMitaksharacoparcenaryproperty,hisinterestinthepropertyshall
devolve by survivorship upon the surviving members of the coparcenary and not in
accordancewiththisAct:
Providedthat,ifthedeceasedhadlefthimsurvivingafemalerelativespecifiedinclassIof
the Schedule or a male relative specified in that class who claims through such female
relative,theinterestofthedeceasedintheMitaksharacoparcenarypropertyshalldevolveby
testamentaryorintestatesuccession,asthecasemaybeandnotbysurvivorship.
Explanation 1. For the purpose of this section, the interest of a Hindu Mitakshara
coparcenershallbedeemedtobetheshareinthepropertythatwouldhavebeenallottedto
himifapartitionofthepropertyhadtakenplaceimmediatelybeforehisdeath,irrespectiveof
whetherhewasentitledtoclaimpartitionornot.
Explanation 2. Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as
enablingapersonwhohasseparatedhimselffromthecoparcenarybeforethedeathofthe
deceasedoranyofhisheirstoclaimonintestacyashareintheinterestreferredtotherein.
14/23
1/30/2016
[15]Section2ofHinduSuccessionAct,1965:ApplicationofAct
(1)ThisActapplies
(a)toanyperson,whoisaHindubyreligioninanyofitsformsordevelopmentsincludinga
Virashaiva,aLingayatorafolloweroftheBrahmo,PrarthanaorAryaSamaj
(b)toanypersonwhoisBuddhist,JainaorSikhbyreligionand
(c)toanyotherpersonwhoisnotaMuslim,Christian,ParsiorJewbyreligionunlessitis
proved that any such person would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by any
customorusageaspartofthatlawinrespectofanyofthemattersdealtwithhereinifthis
Acthadnotbeenpassed.
Explanation : The following persons are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion, as
thecase
maybe:
(a)anychild,legitimateorillegitimate,bothofwhoseparentsareHindus,Buddhists,Jainas
or
Sikhsbyreligion
(b)anychild,legitimateorillegitimate,oneofwhoseparentsisaHindu,Buddhist,Jainaor
Sikh
by religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to
whichsuch
parentbelongsorbelonged
(c)anypersonwhoisaconvertorreconverttotheHindu,Buddhist,JainaorSikhreligion.
(2)Notwithstandinganythingcontainedinsubsection(1),nothingcontainedinthisActshall
applytothemembersofanyScheduledTribewithinthemeaningofclause(25)ofarticle366
of the Constitution unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette,
15/23
1/30/2016
otherwisedirects.
(3) The expression Hindu in any portion of this Act shall be construed as if it included a
person who, though not a Hindu by religion is, nevertheless, a person to whom this Act
appliesbyvirtueoftheprovisionscontainedinthissection.
[16]Section6ofHinduSuccessionAct,2005.Devolutionofinterestofcoparcenaryproperty.
(1)OnandfromthecommencementoftheHinduSuccession(Amendment)Act,2005*,ina
JointHindufamilygovernedbytheMitaksharalaw,thedaughterofacoparcenershall,
(a)bybirthbecomeacoparcenerinherownrightinthesamemannerastheson
(b)havethesamerightsinthecoparcenarypropertyasshewouldhavehadifshehadbeen
ason
(c)besubjecttothesameliabilitiesinrespectofthesaidcoparcenarypropertyasthatofa
son,
andanyreferencetoaHinduMitaksharacoparcenershallbedeemedtoincludeareference
toadaughterofacoparcener:
Providedthatnothingcontainedinthissubsectionshallaffectorinvalidateanydispositionor
alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which had taken
placebeforethe20thdayofDecember,2004.
(2)AnypropertytowhichafemaleHindubecomesentitledbyvirtueofsub
section(1)shall
be held by her with the incidents of coparcenary ownership and shall be regarded,
notwithstandinganythingcontainedinthisActoranyotherlawforthetimebeinginforcein,
aspropertycapableofbeingdisposedofbyherbytestamentarydisposition.
(3)WhereaHindudiesafterthecommencementoftheHinduSuccession(Amendment)Act,
2005*, his interest in the property of a Joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law,
shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act
andnotbysurvivorship,andthecoparcenarypropertyshallbedeemedtohavebeendivided
asifapartitionhadtakenplaceand,
16/23
1/30/2016
(a)thedaughterisallottedthesameshareasisallottedtoason
(b)theshareofthepredeceasedsonorapredeceaseddaughter,astheywouldhavegot
hadtheybeenaliveatthetimeofpartition,shallbeallottedtothesurvivingchildofsuchpre
deceasedsonorofsuchpredeceaseddaughterand
(c) the share of the predeceased child of a predeceased son or of a pre
deceased
daughter,assuchchildwouldhavegothadheorshebeenaliveatthetimeofthepartition,
shall be allotted to the child of such predeceased child of the predeceased son or a pre
deceaseddaughter,asthecasemaybe.
Explanation. For the purposes of this subsection, the interest of a Hindu Mitakshara
coparcenershallbedeemedtobetheshareinthepropertythatwouldhavebeenallottedto
himifapartitionofthepropertyhadtakenplaceimmediatelybeforehisdeath,irrespectiveof
whetherhewasentitledtoclaimpartitionornot.
(4) After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005*, no court
shall recognise any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great
grandson for the
recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or greatgrandfather solely on the
groundofthepiousobligationundertheHindulaw,ofsuchson,grandsonorgreatgrandson
todischargeanysuchdebt:
Provided that in the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of the Hindu
Succession(Amendment)Act,2005*,nothingcontainedinthissubsectionshallaffect
(a)therightofanycreditortoproceedagainsttheson,grandsonorgreatgrandson,asthe
casemaybeor
(b)anyalienationmadeinrespectoforinsatisfactionof,anysuchdebt,andanysuchright
oralienationshallbeenforceableundertheruleofpiousobligationinthesamemannerand
to the same extent as it would have been enforceable as if the Hindu Succession
(Amendment)Act,2005hadnotbeenenacted.
Explanation. For the purposes of clause (a), the expression son, grandson or great
grandsonshallbedeemedtorefertotheson,grandsonorgreatgrandson,asthecasemay
be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession
(Amendment)Act,2005*.
17/23
1/30/2016
(5)Nothingcontainedinthissectionshallapplytoapartition,whichhasbeeneffectedbefore
the20thdayofDecember,2004.
Explanation. For the purposes of this section partition means any partition made by
executionofadeedofpartitiondulyregisteredundertheRegistrationAct,1908(16of1908)
orpartitioneffectedbyadecreeofacourt.]
Youmayalsolike:
LOKADALATS
PUBLIC
POLICYIN
CONTRACTS:
RECENT
TRENDS
RULEOFLAW
ININDIA
JUDICIAL
ACTIVISM
UNDER
ARTICLE21
LokAdalats
PublicPolicyIn
Contracts:Recent
Trends
RuleofLawinIndia
JudicialActivism
underArticle21
ABUSEOF
DOMINANCE:
THE
MICROSOFT
CASES
THEROLEOF FUTUREOF
INDIAN
CRIMINOLOGY
JUDICIARYIN
PROTECTION
OF
ENVIRONMENT
ININDIA
DISCHARGEBY
PERFORMANCE
&CONTINGENT
CONTRACTS
AbuseOf
Dominance:The
MicrosoftCases
TheRoleofIndian
Judiciaryin
Protectionof
EnvironmentinIndia
Dischargeby
Performance&
Contingentcontracts
Futureof
Criminology
18/23
1/30/2016
AdsbyShareaholic
FiledUnder:FamilyLaw
TaggedWith:coparcenary
Leave a Reply
Youremailaddresswillnotbepublished.Requiredfieldsaremarked*
Name*
Email*
Website
Comment
19/23
1/30/2016
YoumayusetheseHTMLtagsandattributes:<ahref=""title=""><abbrtitle="">
<acronymtitle=""><b><blockquotecite=""><cite><code><deldatetime="">
<em><i><qcite=""><strike><strong>
POSTCOMMENT
SEARCH
CATEGORIES
DirectTaxation
ADR
Arbitration&ConciliationAct
BankingLaw
Bankruptcy&Insolvency
BiotechnologyLaw
BusinessLaws
20/23
1/30/2016
CivilProcedureCode&Lawof
Limitation
CodeofCriminalProcedure
competition
CompetitionLaw
Constitutional&AdministrativeLaw
ConsumerProtectionAct
ContractLaw
Copyright
CorporateFinance
CorporateGovernance
CriminalLaw
CriminologyandVictimology
EconomicOffences
Economics
EnvironmentalLaw
FamilyLaw
GenderandLaw
HumanitarianandRefugeeLaw
Humanities
IndianEvidenceAct
IndianPenalCode
InformationTechnologyLaw
InsuranceLaw
IntellectualPropertyRights
InternationalCommercialArbitration
InternationalEnvironmentalLaw
InternationalHumanRightsLaw
InternationalLabourLaws
InternationalLaw
InternationalOrganization
21/23
1/30/2016
InternationalTradeLaw
InternationalTreatyArbitration
InterpretationofStatutes
InvestmentLaw
IPRinPharmaIndustry
Jurisprudence
LabourLaw
LandAcquisition
LawandEconomics
LawoftheSea
LawofTorts
LegalHistory
LegalMethods
LegalServicesAuthoritiesAct/Lok
Adalats
MaritimeLaw
Media&CyberLaw
Mediation
Merger&Acquisition
OffencesAgainstChild&Juvenile
Offence
Patents
Penology&Victimology
PoliticalScience
PrivateInternationalLaw
ProbationandParole
ProceduralLaws
PropertyLaw
PublicInternationalLaw
SecuritiesLaw
Sociology
22/23
1/30/2016
SpaceLaw
SpecialContract
TaxLaw
Trademarks
Uncategorized
WhiteCollarCrime
Women&CriminalLaw
RECENT POSTS
ScopeofEnforcementofDPSPs
ContractsandQuasiContracts
Thesettingredsunofdarkwater
MedicalNegligence
ComparisonOfTrialProcedure
BetweenIndianCourtsAndFranch
Courts
Copyright2016GenesisFrameworkWordPressLogin
23/23

Coparcenary in India - It's Past, Present and Future - Academike

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Coparcenary in India - It's Past, Present and Future - Academike

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1/30/2016

Coparcenary in India: Its Past, Present

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen