Coparcenary Rights

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition LEGAL ISSUE: The central legal question revolves around the inheritance rights of daughters in ancestral property under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, particularly concerning the impact of the 2005 amendment. CASE TYPE: Civil, Property Partition Case Name: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the interpretation of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended in 2005, concerning the rights of daughters in ancestral property

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Civil Law, Compromise Decree, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Law, Joint Family Property, Judges, Property Rights, Reconveyance

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a compromise decree entered into by some coparceners without the consent of other coparceners is binding on the latter, especially when the property has been reconveyed and has assumed the character of joint family property. CASE TYPE: Civil

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Daughters Equal Coparcenary Rights: Danamma vs. Amar (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Coparcenary Rights, Gender Equality, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, Judges

Supreme Court Grants Daughters Equal Coparcenary Rights: Danamma vs. Amar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether daughters can be denied coparcenary rights in a Hindu joint family governed by Mitakshara law solely because they were born before the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and whether the 2005 amendment grants daughters coparcenary rights by birth, equal

Supreme Court Grants Daughters Equal Coparcenary Rights: Danamma vs. Amar (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top