1

DR. SHAKUNTALA MISRA NATIONAL REHABILITATION

UNIVERISTY

LUCKNOW

SYNOPSIS ON

“Concept of succession and inheritance under Mitakshra joint

Hindu family”

(UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF Prof. Vijeta Dua)

Assignment of Family Law 2nd

SUBMITTED TO:

Prof. Vijeta Dua

Faculty of law

SUBMITTED BY:

Gaurav shukla

B.comLL.B(Hons)* 6thth sem

2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The completion of this Assignment could not have been possible without the participation and
assistance of so many people whose names may not all the be enumerated. Their contribution
is sincerely appreciated and gratefully acknowledged. However, I would like to express my
deep appreciation and indebtedness particularly to the following
Prof.Vijeta Dua for her endless support, kind and understanding spirit during making of this
assignment.
To all relatives, friends and others who in one way or another shared their support, either
morally, financially and physically, thank you.
Above all, to the Great Almighty, the author of knowledge and wisdom, for his countless love.
I thank you all.
3

Table of contents

1. Introduction
2. Institution of Hindu Joint Family

3. Inheritance under Mitakshra

4. Devolution of Mitakshara coparcenary property under Hindu Succession
Act
5. Devolution of Mitakshara coparcenary property by Survivorship.
6. Succession to the property of a Hindu Male
7. Laws of succession in case of inter faith marriages, under Special Marriage
Act, 1954.
4

Introduction

The Hindu joint family is a normal condition of the Hindu society. Its origin can be traced to
the ancient partriarchal system where the patriarch or the head of the family was the
unquestioned ruler, laying down norms for the members of his family to follow, obeyed by
everyone in his family and having an unparallel control over their lives and properties.
Therefore, under Hindu law the joint family system came first in historical order and the
individual recognition of a person distinct from the family thereafter. The ancient system
generally treated the property acquired by the member of the family as family property or the
joint property of the family with family members having one or the other right over it. With
gradual transformation of the society and recognition of the members of the family as
independent in their own right, concept of separate property and rules for its inheritance were
developed. This dual property system, though considerably diluted1, has survived the lashes of
time, the judicial and legislative onslaught and the Hindu society still recognizes the joint
family and joint family property as unique entities having no similar concept alive elsewhere
in the world. One of the most significant ideas behind the evolution of family was to provide
security to the members. The joint and undivided Hindu family is the normal condition of the
Hindu society. An undivided Hindu family is ordinarily joint, not only in estate, but also in food
and worship. The joint family system comes first and law of inheritance is of later growth.
According to dharma sastra it is the duty of the house holder to provide that safety and security
to children, the old and the infirm and the other such members of the family who cannot be
independent. Normally the senior most male member is seen as the guardian figure who
exercises control over all affairs of the family2. Mitakshara school owes its nomenclature to
Vijnanesvara’s commentary of that name on the yajnavalkya smritis3. The Mitakshara system
prevails in whole of India except in Bengal and its adjoining parts. The systems are based upon
the text of Manu which reads: ‘to the nearest Sapinda the inheritance next belongs, after them,
the Sakulyas, the preceptor of the Vedas, or a pupil4. The Mitakshara is meant the nearest in
blood, the rule of consanguinity or proximity of blood relationship became the basis of

1
While in the State of Kerala the concept of joint family has been abolished, four States to begin with by
introducing unmarried daughters as coparceners. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 has brought
equality and presently a daughter and a son are members of their father's joint family in an identical manner.
2
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/equity-law/inheritance-under-traditional-hindu-law-equity-
law-essay.php
3
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/equity-law/inheritance-under-traditional-hindu-law-equity-
law-essay.php
4
http://www.shareyouressays.com/117779/get-complete-information-on-mitakshara-law-of-inheritance
5

determining the line of succession. The characteristic feature of Mitakshara law of succession
is “the principle of propinquity with this most important qualification that no cognate excepting
a daughter’s son can succeed in preference to an agnate”. This system does not mention the
rule of religious or spiritual efficacy as the basis of succession, although the Virmitrodaya
formulates and makes use of it in finding a position for the great grandson among the direct
mail descendants of the deceased on whom the property devolves before the widow and the
rest can claim succession.

Institution of Hindu Joint Family

The institution of a Hindu Joint Family5 is peculiar to the Hindu jurisprudence and has its origin
in ancient orthodox texts and writings of Smritikars etc. Though, it originated in the
propagation of the theory of despotism and autocracy in the father, yet by efflux of time, such
a concept considerably loped down so as to confer equal rights on his sons by birth. The
introduction of coparceners by birth into the family considerably whittled down the absolute
power of the father. Several other inroads into such unitary rights and privileges of the father,
where incursions had to be made with the growth of society and the appreciation of the value
of individual rights, resulted in the enlargement of the body constituting the joint Hindu
family6. A joint Hindu family consists of all male members lineally descended from a common
male ancestor and includes their wives unmarried daughters and adopted children. A daughter
on marriage ceases to be a member of her father's family and becomes a member of husband's
family. The Smritis and Commentaries make a mention of the words kutumba or avibhakta
kutumba for joint or undivided family. A joint or undivided family is the normal condition of
Hindus which is ordinarily joint in food, worship and estate (Creature of Law).

In Surjit Lal v. Common. I.T.7 the Supreme Court elaborates that outside the limits of
coparcenary, there is a fringe of person males and females, who constitute an undivided family.
There is no limit to the number of persons who compose it, nor to their remoteness from their
common ancestor and to their relationship lineally or laterally with one-another. To be a
member of the family one may be added by birth, marriage or adoption. A female who comes
in the family by marriage becomes sapinda of her husband. The joint family is thus a larger

5
The expression "Hindu Joint Family" is synonymous with the expression "Hindu Undivided Family" used in the
Income Tax Act, 1961.
6
Acharya Shuklendra, Hindu Law 601 (2005)
7
1976 HLR (SC) 146.
6

body consisting of a group of persons who are united by the knot of sapindaship arising by
birth, marriage or adoption.

Inheritance under Mitakshra

To Mitakshara it meant the nearest in blood, the rule of consanguinity or proximity of blood relationship
became the basis of determining the line of succession. The characteristic feature of Mitakshara law of
succession is the principle of propinquity with this most important qualification that no cognate
excepting a daughter’s son can succeed in preference to an agnate. This system does not mention the
rule of religious or spiritual efficacy as the basis of succession, although the Virmitrodaya formulates
and makes use of it in finding a position for the great grandson among the direct mail descendants of
the deceased on whom the property devolves before the widow and the rest can claim succession8.

Agnates are Preferred to Cognates

Mitakashara the preferential right to inherit is determined by family relationship or community of
corporeal particles. But in Mitakshara, while holding that the right to inherit does not spring from the
right to offer oblation does not exclude it from consideration as a test of propinquity or nearness of
blood when a question of preference arises in doubtful cases. It also did not lay down any rules to govern
the inheritance of the separate property of male who died an undivided member of joint family without
leaving male issue of his own.

The Privy Council observed that in Katitma Nachiar v. Raja of Shivaganga, that the rule of
inheritance stated in the Mitakshara, should, on principle, be extended to the separate property of a man
when he died an undivided member of a joint family but without leaving male issue. Accordingly, in
the Mitakshara areas the law of succession followed the nature of Property, where the property was
coparcenary property it followed the rules laid down by the law of partition and where the property was
separate property it followed the rules laid down by the law of inheritance strictly so called. Thus, in
the case of a male Hindu governed by the Mitakshara there was no unity of succession; and there could
be two courses of devolution of his property.

Devolution of Mitakshara coparcenary property under Hindu Succession

Act: -

This monograph deals with the law relating to devolution of Mitakshara coparcenary property
under Hindu law, pins out its lacunas and submits certain suggestions to remove its existing

8
http://www.shareyouressays.com/117779/get-complete-information-on-mitakshara-law-of-inheritance
7

anomalies. The law dealing with this subject is embodied under section 6 of the Hindu
Succession Act 1956, which reads as:

When a male Hindu dies after the commencement of this Act, having, at the time of
his death an interest in a Mitakshara coparcenary property, his interest in the
property shall devolve by survivorship upon the surviving members of the
coparcenary and not in accordance with this Act.

The Incidents of this section are:

(i) a male Hindu

(ii) dying after the commencement of this Act;
(iii) leaving an interest in a coparcenary property; and
(iv) application of the law of -survivorship.

This section comes to operate if a male Hindu dies after the commencement of this Act, i.e..
after 17th June, 1956 and leaves behind his interest in the Mitakshara coparcenary property. If
he leaves behind his self-acquired property or property governed 'by -Dayabhaga school of
law then this provision will not apply. If a female dies leaving behind some property that will
be dealt under the provisions of sections 14, 15 and 16 of the Act.

Devolution of Mitakshara coparcenary property by Survivorship.

The Mitakshara recognizes 'two modes of devolution: of property, namely, survivorship and
'succession. The rule of survivor relative, specified in that class who claims, through such
female relative, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara. coparcenary property shall
devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by
survivorship. This proviso creates an exception to the general rule of devolution by
survivorship in regard to coparcenary property in the Mitakshara school. Its main ingredients
are that if a male governed by Mitakshara law dies. leaving coparcenary or joint family
property, and leaving any of the female heirs mentioned in class I of the schedule to the Act,
or a male relative specified in that class who claims through such female (such as a son of the
predeceased daughter) his interest in the coparcenary property would devolve under the
provisions of this Act and not by survivorship. The heirs specified in class I of the Schedule
are classed as: Primary heirs: primary 'heirs we son, daughter, widow and mother. Secondary
8

heirs: It is further classified as: predeceased son's family, i.e., his son, daughter and widow;
predeceased daughter's family, i.e., her son and daughter; predeceased grandson's family, i.e.
his son, daughter and widow. These are twelve in number. Out of these twelve eight are
women, i.e., mother, widow, daughter, daughter and widow of a predeceased son, .daughter
of a predeceased daughter, daughter and widow of a predeceased grandson. -Law further
includes son of a predeceased daughter and numbers nine in total. If the deceased is survived,
inter cilia, by any of these nine female heirs the rules of succession will operate. It means the
presence of be confined within the framework of that purpose. It neither effects a severance of
status 'nor does it demarcate the interest of the other coparceners or of those who are entitled
to a share on partition. It has to be used to demarcate the interest of the deceased coparcener,
once that is don; rest should be forgotten. Allotment of shares to the coparceners in a notional
partition is a fiction, though a necessary fiction, without the aid of which it would be
impossible to demarcate the interest of the deceased coparcener. The quantum of the share of
the deceased coparcener will be on the footing of the coparcenary property existing at the date
of his death and not as it may exist when properties are actually allotted to his heirs9. Now the
question is, how notional partition is to be made? The formula: is, had there been an actual
partition immediately before the coparcener died what he would have got. In other words,
shares are to be 'allotted (though nominally) to all persons who would have been entitled to a
share on a real partition. On the 'basis of this allotment, we get the share of the deceased
coparcener. It is this share which will go by inheritance. For example, X and his two sons Y
and Z are members of a Mitakshara coparcenary. X dies leaving him surviving Y, Z and his
daughter S. To determine X's share — national partition takes place and on partition he gets
1/3rd share. For partition Old law continues to apply which excludes daughter. But X's 1/3rd
share will be inherited 'equally by his two son’s Y and Z and daughter S. When partition takes
place between members of a joint family every coparcener is 'entitled to a share. But a partition
between coparceners may be partial as, for instance, when one copolymer separates himself
from others. This rule is embodied in explanation II as: Nothing Contained in the proviso to
this section shall be construed as enabling a person who has separated himself that of the son,
that is one-half, was available for partition between the next heirs. So, widow was given only
1/10.

9
Paras Diwan Modern Hindu Law, (1974), 368,
9

In Ranubai v. Laxman Lalji Patil10,the facts are Lalji Patil dies leaving behind his wife and
adopted son. The widow filed the present suit claiming 1/2 share in the property and so was
granted. J. Patil, who was the member in deciding both the cases, dissented from Shirambai's
decision and held in the present case that widow is entitled to get a shame at the partition and
further more to succession of her husband's share.

In Sindrappa v. Laxmi Bai11,case is a joint Hindu family consisted of B and his two son’s J
and S. B died in 1923 leaving his widow. J died in 1961 leaving behind him his two widows.
J's widows sued for partition and possession of a 1/3 share. They contended explanation II to
Section 6 provides that a person to whom a share is allotted at a partition could not again
become entitled to a share by inheritance. J's mother has got her share on partition so is
separated and is no more heirs to rs share. The court held that 1/3 share of J which he got on
partition of the suit property belongs to his widows only.

In Sushilabai v. Narayanrao12, a son died in December 1956 leaving behind his mother, father
and widow. In 1957, mother also died. Her daughter Namyanrao brought a suit for partition
and separate possession of her (share in moveable and immoveable property. Father too died
during the pendency of the suit making a will whereby he disposed of his interest in the family
property in favour of a society. Under these circumstances Court granted her 1/4 share. As on
notional partition mother gets 1/3 and 1/6 as an heir of her son. Out of this 1/2 share, 1/4 goes
to the daughter Narayanrao.

Succession to the property of a Hindu Male

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, is a law that was passed by the ‘Parliament of India’. The preamble
the Act signifies that an Act to amend and codify the law relating to intestate succession among Hindus.
The Act lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of succession whereas attempt has been made
to ensure equality inheritance rights between sons and daughters. It applies to all Hindus including
Buddhists Jains and Sikhs. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 preserves the dual mode of devolution of
property under the Mitakshara School. The joint family still devolves by Survivorship with this
important exception that if a Mitakshara Coparcener dies leaving behind mother, widow, daughter,

10
AJI.R. 1966 Boon. 169.
11
Mysore Law Journal 1965, (1) p. 625.
12
AIR. 1975 Bum. 251
10

daughter’s daughter, son’s daughter, son’s son’s daughter, son’s widow, son’s son’s widow, or
daughter’s son his interest in the joint family property will devolve by succession.

 The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 deals with the inheritance to

a) The separate properties of a Mitakshara male,

b) The separate and coparceners properties of a Dayabhaga male, and

c) The undivided interest in the joint family property of a Mitakshara Coparcener.

The Act does not apply to the property of a Hindu who is married under the Special Marriage Act to a
non -Hindu.

 Heirs of a Hindu Male

The heirs of Hindu male fall under the following categories:-

1) Class I heirs,

2) Class II heirs,

3) Agnates,

4) Cognates, and

5) Government.

 Class I heirs:-

The property of a Hindu Male dying intestate would be given first to heirs within Class I. They are:

i. Mother,

ii. Widow,

iii. Daughter,

iv. Son,

v. Widow of a predeceased son,

vi. Son of a predeceased son,

11

vii. Daughter of a predeceased son,

viii. Widow of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

ix. Daughter of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

x. Son of a predeceased son of a predeceased son,

xi. Daughter of a predeceased daughter, and

xii. Son of a predeceased daughter.

 Some new heirs are added by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005. They are:

i. Son of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased daughter,

ii. Daughter of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased daughter,

iii. Daughter of a predeceased son of a predeceased daughter, and

iv. Daughter of a predeceased daughter of a predeceased son.

 Shares of Class I heirs :

Section 10, Hindu Succession Act deals with the distribution of the property of the porosities, among
class I heirs. The rules are:

A.] Sons, daughters and the mother of the porosities each take one share.

For example:-

If ‘P’ dies leaving behind his Mother ‘M’, two sons S1 and S2 and two

Daughters D1 and D2, each of the above heirs will take one share, i.e., 1/5th

-‘M’ will take 1/5th ;

- D1 and D2 each will also take 1/5th &

- S1 and S2 each will take one fifth.

B.] Widow takes1 share. If there are more than one widow, all of them together take one

Share and among themselves they divide it equally.

12

For example:-

‘P’ dies leaving behind a widow, ‘W’ and three daughters ‘D’, ‘D1’, and ‘D2’. Here each will take one
share, i.e. 1/4th to each.‘W’ will take 1/4th,‘D’, ‘D1’ &‘D2’ each will take 1/4th .

C.] Among the heirs of the branches of a predeceased son, son of a predeceased son of a predeceased
son and predeceased daughter, so here the doctrine of representation applies

i.e. heirs in each branch would take the same share which their parent would have taken.

So, we see above three rules in the following example:

If ‘P’ dies leaving behind son ‘S’, widow of a predeceased son ‘S1’, ‘SW’, Predeceased daughter’s son
and daughter ‘DS’ and ‘DD’, predeceased son’s Predeceased son’s widow ‘SSW’, his daughter ‘SSD’
and his son ‘SSS’. Distribution is first to be made at a place where branches come into existence.

There are four branches, each will take 1/4th share i.e.

- ‘S’ will take 1/4th .In the branch of ‘S1’ there is only one heir ‘SW’, she representing ‘S1’ will take
1/4th .

- In the branch of predeceased daughter, there are two heirs, they representing her will take 1/4th and
between themselves divide it equally, with result that ‘DS’ will take 1/8th and ‘DD’ will take 1/8th .

- In the branch of predeceased grandson, there are three heirs, representing him

they will take 1/4th & among themselves share it equally, with the result that ‘SSW’, ‘SSD’&‘SSS’
each will take 1/12th.

Class II heirs and their shares:

If there are no heirs in Class I, the property will given to the heirs within Class II. They are divided into
nine categories. The rule is that an heir in an earlier category excludes heirs in later category. Further
all heirs in one category take simultaneously per capita share. They are as follows:

 Category I -

a) Father.

 Category II -

a) Son’s daughter’s son.

b) Son’s daughter’s daughter.

13

c) Brother.

d) Sister.

 Category III -

a) Daughter’s son’s son.

b) Daughter’s son’s daughter.

c) Daughter’s daughter’s son.

d) Daughter’s daughter’s daughter.

Category IV -

a) Brother’s son.

b) Brother’s daughter.

c) Sister’s son.

d) Sister’s daughter.

 Category V -

a) Father’s father.

b) Father’s mother.

 Category VI -

a) Father’s widow. [Step mother].

b) Brother’s widow.

 Category VII -

a) Father’s brother.

b) Father’s sister.

 Category VIII -

a) Mother’s father.

b) Mother’s mother.

 Category IX –

a) Mother’s brother.
14

b) Mother’s sister.

The rule of share in Class-II heirs is that each will take per capita including widow.

Agnates and Cognates:

Next heir of Hindu male is ‘Agnates and Cognates’. In it first preference is given to ‘Agnates’ & then
‘Cognates’. The rules for determining who are agnates & cognates are the same; so are the rules relating
to distribution of property among them.

Agnates mean when a person traces his relationship with another through males, he or she is an
‘Agnates’.

For instance; - brother, brother’s son, son’s son, son’s son father, father’s father, father’s mother,
father’s father’s father & mother, son’s daughter, son’s son’s daughter etc. are agnates.

On other hand cognates means whenever in the relationship of a person with another, a female (or more
than one female) interverence anywhere in the line, one cognate to another. For instance sister’s sons
& daughters; daughter’s sons & daughters; mother’s mother & father; father’s mother’s father &
mother; mother’s father’s son & daughter etc. are all cognates.

Government:

If some Hindu male leaves behind neither class I, nor class II, nor any agnates, nor any cognates upon
his death, then, his entire property lapses to the government. This is called as “Escheat”. When
government takes his property as heir, it takes with subject to all the obligations and liabilities of
porosities.

Succession to a Mitakshara Coparcener’s Interest

The Section 6 of the Act has been extensively amended by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act,
2005; while recognizing the rule of devolution by Survivorship among the members of the coparcener
makes an exception to the rule in the proviso.

According to proviso, if the deceased has left a surviving female relative specified in class I or a male
relative specified in that class who claim through such female relation, the interest of a deceased in
Mitakshara Coparceners property shall devolve by testamentary of instate succession under the Act and
not as Survivorship.

Certain exceptions:-

If , and the heirs are both male and female, the female heir is not allowed to request partition until the
male heir chooses to divide their respective shares. If this female heir is a daughter, she has the right to
reside in the home if she is unmarried, divorced or widowed.
15

After the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005; Section 6, the difference between the female and
male inheritor has been abolished . Now even female inheritor [daughter] can also claim partition of the
ancestral property.

Further any person who commits murder is disqualified from receiving any form of inheritance from
the victim. If a relative convert from Hinduism, he or she is still eligible for inheritance.

Inheritance and Succession, Rights of Women and Daughters under Personal

Laws13
The general law relating to the inheritance and succession can easily be referred to The Indian
Succession Act, 1925. Under this Act every Indian is entitled to equal shares on inheriting the
property on the death of a person. The exceptions are Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and
Muslims as they are governed under separate laws of succession. As for the persons of different
faiths than Hinduism and Mohammedan, the Indian Succession Act, 1925 applies.

We can easily segregate the laws of non-testamentary or intestate succession and inheritance
as would be applicable to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhist and with Parsis, Christians and
Jews with that of Muslims and with persons of inter faith marriages.

Laws of succession applicable to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhist; for the non-testamentary
or intestate succession/inheritance, the governing law is the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Laws of succession applicable to Parsis; for the intestate succession the governing law is the
Indian Succession Act, 1925 specifically under section 50 to 56 of the Indian Succession Act,
1925.

Laws of succession applicable to Christians and Jews; for the intestate the governing law is the
Indian Succession Act, 1925 specifically under section 31 to 49 of the Act.

Laws of succession governing Muslims; for non-testamentary succession the The Muslim
Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 is applicable and where a muslim has died
testate, the issue has to be governed under the Indian Succession Act, 1925 where a Will relates
to immovable property situate within the State of West Bengal, and that of Madras and Mumbai
Jurisdiction.

13
http://www.lexorates.com/articles/inheritance-and-succession-rights-of-women-and-daughters-under-
personal-laws/
16

Laws of succession in case of inter faith marriages, under Special Marriage

Act, 1954.

Under Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the properties of a Hindu male dying intestate devolves,
in the first instance, equally on his sons, daughters, widow and mother and include the specified
heirs of predeceased sons or daughters. The widow of the deceased is entitled to inherit equally
with sons and daughters. The provisions of section 30 of the Act raise issues which are
questionable in nature whereby the deceased husband, if he so desires, may write a Will and
exclude his wife. The Will may contain bequeath of all his properties and no means of support
to the widow. If there be a meticulous reasoning, the rights of the Women and Daughters under
the Hindu Succession Act can be resolved; the Gender inequalities in succession law proliferate
extensively. Another aspect which is equally complicated is The Streedhan — Streedhan is the
property held by a woman in India and treating the Streedhan on the death of the husband is
also to be redressed by making suitable changes by the Parliament and address these and many
other issues in the biased inheritance law under the Hindu Succession.

The law applicable to India can be said to be unlike for the State of Maharastra where the
women and more particularly the daughters have dual advantage. A daughter is entitled to a
share in the father’s Hindu undivided family, generally regarded as (HUF) as well as a share in
the husband’s HUF. This again is meager and notional shares which at times take unending
time in the legal foray in situations where the male heirs do not approach the court for the
division of the property of the deceased.

Under the Mitakshara teachings, the joint family property devolves by survivorship and when
a male Hindu dies after the commencement of this Act having at the time of his death an interest
in a Mitakshara coparcenery property, his interest in the property shall devolve by survivorship
upon the surviving members of the coparcenery and not in accordance with this Act. The
concept however is viewed differently when the Mitakshara coparcener dies leaving behind a
female relative or male relative claiming through Class I, this undivided interest will not
devolve by survivorship but by succession as provided under the Hindu Succession Act,
1956. Class I heirs are Son, Daughter, Widow, Mother, Son of a predeceased son, Daughter
of predeceased son, Widow of predeceased son, Son of a predeceased daughter, Daughter of
predeceased daughter, Son of predeceased so of predeceased son, Daughter of predeceased son
of a predeceased son, Widow of predeceased son of a predeceased son. The Indian Succession
17

Act, 1925, states that everyone is entitled to equal inheritance, barring exceptions to Hindus,
Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Muslims. Under the act, the daughter of a person dying intestate
would be entitled only to one-fourth of the son’s share, or Rs. 5,000/-, whichever is lesser, this
amount is also termed as Streedhan and this entitlement excludes the women from any further
right in seeking a proper division of the properties of the deceased. The bias and gender
deprecation is the only factor that the Indian women and daughters are isolated and remain
dependent on the male heirs for their share and right in the seeking distribution of the property
and giving rise to differences in the families and long legal battles. In order to set at rest the
long drawn legal battles and animosity among the heirs of the deceased, the law of succession
should be emphatically amended to provide and give equal inheritance to all, irrespective of
the gender discrimination and bias. Special emphasis to property distribution among Hindus,
the succession right by birth should be abolished and the Mitakshara coparcenary should be
converted into Dayabhaga, which means equal distribution of not only separate or self acquired
properties of the diseased male, but also of undivided interests in coparcenary property. It
should also consider a daughter of a coparcener in a HUF under Mitakshara law to be
coparcener by birth as of a son on the right of claim in the property in equal shares in the
coparcenary property. I have learnt that there have been many representations to the
Government on this issue of equal rights to women under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 have
been made and soon a legislation to amend the Hindu Succession Act will be made which will
provide for giving daughters and sons equal rights in the property. The Legislation will also
consider the marital status of the woman and irrespective of her status; the women shall have
full right to inherit the ancestral property like a son of the family. On the anvil of the legislation
making its mark as a statue, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 may have to be completely
abolished with regard to the rights to a daughter in the Hindu Mitakshara Coparcenary Property
as to that of the sons. The objective of the amendment should be to curb any kind of dispute
with regard to the shares in the property and also in view of the amendment to the law in some
States in India. It should however be clear that during the lifetime of the parents the properties
acquired and divided either by gifts or by virtue of a Will, the equal and determinate shares, if
any, would become ineffective. Therefore, the changes in the law and amendments should also
consider this aspect and lay a comprehensive and good law of inheritance and succession
without being partial and bias to the gender.