Daughter Has No Inheritance Right In Father's Properties If He Died Before 1956, Leaving Behind Daughter & Her Mother: Bombay High Court
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday (November 12) held that a daughter will not have any limited or absolute right of inheritance in the properties of her father, if he has died prior to the enforcement of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
A division bench of Justices Atul Chandurkar and Jitendra Jain answered a reference - Whether a daughter could acquire any right, either limited or absolute, by inheritance prior to coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in the property of her deceased father, who died prior to 1956, leaving behind him in addition to such daughter, his widow as well? - made by a single-judge, way back on February 28, 2007.
Answering the said reference, the bench referred to the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and also the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937, which dealt with the issues of rights of women in the family, in the properties of their husbands or fathers.
"Under Hindu customs, a daughter when born, on reaching marriageable age is married and sent to her in-laws house. Therefore, a daughter was never considered as a part of the family in the era when 1937 Act was in operation. It is also important to note that the 1937 Act is a Pre-Independence enactment. During that period, a widow had to be protected on the death of her husband since she could not go back to her parents house and at the same time, her husband could not take care of her since he was no more. With a view to get over such a situation that limited rights were conferred on a widow by the Act of 1937. A daughter was however excluded from claiming any inheritance right prior to the enactment of the Act of 1956," the bench said in its judgment.
The law has been progressive from 1937, whereby limited rights were given to the widow which were converted into full rights on enactment of the Act of 1956 and which further progressed and gave right as a coparcener to a daughter under the Amendment Act of 2005, the judges noted.
"However, that would not mean that in case of a death prior to 1956, daughter would have any right when the succession opened prior to 1956," the bench made it clear.
The bench disposed of a second appeal filed way back in 1987 involving two step-sisters, over the properties of their father.
The appellant was the daughter of the deceased father from his first wife. The respondent, was the daughter from the second wife. While the first wife had died prior to the death of the father, subsequently, on his death, the properties were inherited by the second wife, and later on her death, the same were bequeathed via a will (by the second wife) to her only daughter.
According to appellant, she too had inheritance right in the properties of her father just like the widow of her father under the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 and the Amendment to the Act of 1956 introduced in 2005.
Referring to the prominent provisions of the Hindu Women's Rights To Property Act, the bench said the same expressly provides only for a “widow” to be treated as a “son” for computing her limited interest to share and to seek partition as a male owner clearly shows that at the relevant time prior to 1956, a daughter would not have any inheritance right if her father died prior to 1956.
With these observations, the bench answered the reference.
Appearance:
Senior Advocate Ram Apte along with Advocates SG Deshmukh, Mayuresh Lagu, Uday Night, Sagat Patil and Sulajja Patil appeared for the Appellants.
Senior Advocate Ashutosh A. Kumbhakoni along with Advocates Sarthak Diwan, Manoj Badgujar, Sneha S. Bhange, RM Haridas, Pratik Rahade, Somnath Thengal, Sumeet Khaire and Anil Shitole represented the Respondents.
Advocates Drupad Patil, Rutuja Ambekar, Namit Pansare, Rugved Kinkar, Srushti Chalke, Abhijit Kadam and Ashish Chavan represented the Other Respondents.
Case Title: Radhabai Shirke vs Keshav Jadhav (Second Appeal 593 of 1987)