EFFECT AND IMPLICATIONS OF AMENDMENT TO SECTION 6 OF HINDU SUCCESSION ACT

Abstract

The 2005 amendment to section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 has sharply overturned the traditional notion of a coparcenary by bringing within its fold daughters as well. It has raised a lot of difficult questions. It is now uncertain how this transition would impact concepts like reunion which were hitherto governed by traditional Hindu law. The new provision itself is ambiguously worded and is open to anomalous interpretations. This project attempts to highlight these ambiguities and anomalies. It also looks at the possible ways in which they may be resolved in future.

The struggle over the property rights of women has been a protracted one, and the accomplishments have been few and far between. Also, till the advent of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 [hereinafter HSA], most of the reforms were directed towards protecting the rights of wives. The introduction of the concept of notional partition in section 6 of the HSA, with the daughter as a class I heir, was probably one of the first steps in the statutory recognition of a daughter’s right in her father’s property.

Prior to the aforementioned enactment, the Hindu Law Committee had recommended the abolition of the concept of right by birth, but the suggestion had been met with stiff opposition from the patriarchal forces in society which were unwilling to concede the possibility of granting equal rights to a daughter. The idea of making daughters coparceners was likewise rejected. It has taken the Parliament nearly fifty years to grant a right by birth to daughters, and then also the attempt has been half-hearted, as is evident from the number of anomalies it has produced.