COURT: | Supreme Court |
CORAM: | Abhay Manohar Sapre J, R. K. Agrawal J |
SECTION(S): | Hindu Law, Hindu Succession Act 1956 |
GENRE: | Other Laws |
CATCH WORDS: | Hindu Law, Hindu Succession Act 1956, HUF |
COUNSEL: | - |
DATE: | April 19, 2018 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | May 18, 2018 (Date of publication) |
AY: | - |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HUF Law): U/s 29-A of the TN Amendment, only daughters of a coparcener who were not married at the time of commencement of the amendment of 1989 are is entitled to claim partition in the Hindu Joint Family Property. Married daughters are not coparceners and are not entitled to institute suit for partition and separate possession (Danamma @ Suman Surpur Vs. Amar 2018 (1) Scale 657 distinguished) |
Any property inherited upto four generations of male lineage from the father, father’s father or father’s father’s father i.e. father, grand father etc., is termed as ancestral property. In other words, property inherited from mother, grandmother, uncle and even brother is not ancestral property. In ancestral property, the right of property accrues to the coparcener on birth. The concept of ancestral property is in existence since time immemorial. In the State of Tamil Nadu, in order to give equal position to the females in ancestral property, in the year 1989, the State Government enacted the Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989 effective from March 25, 1989 which brought an amendment in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (for brevity “the Act”) by adding Section 29-A vide Chapter II-A under the heading of Succession by Survivorship
Recent Comments