Abstract

According to a recent Supreme Court decision in the case of Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma, the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 has a retrospective rather than prospective effect, meaning that a Hindu daughter’s coparcenary right is not contingent on whether she is the living daughter of a living coparcener at the time the Amendment was enacted. This important decision removed the final impediment to Hindu females gaining equal Status with Hindu sons in Hindu households, and it was warmly greeted by the legal community and advocates for gender equality. However, since its beginnings, the black letter of the law has rarely seemed to penetrate to the very roots of society, where daughters have been seen as a financial burden that must be married off since they are “parayadhan.” It is an ancient and patriarchal belief that males are the exclusive carriers of the family line and should be the lawful owners of their parents’ properties, whilst ‘dutiful’ married girls should focus on their post-marital commitments and not meddle in their parents’ affairs. This three-part article aims to illuminate the various aspects of the daughter’s right of coparcenary pre- and post-amendment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as well as its acceptance in Hindu homes. The first section sheds light on the modifications done in HAS, 2005. The second section critically examines various Supreme Court decisions concerning daughters’ coparcenary rights, while the third section suggests the recommendations to be made in the current statutory laws in India regarding Hindu Women Succession Rights in Property.

Keywords