the daughter of a coparcener shall, also by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son heir. She shall have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son.

The amendment of Hindu succession Act 2005 elaborately.

 According  to  the  amending  Act  of  2005,  in  a  Joint  Hindu  Family  governed  by  the  mitakshara Law,  the  daughter  of  a  coparcener  shall,  also  by  birth  become  a  coparcener  in  her  own  right  in the  same  manner  as  the  son  heir.  She  shall  have  the  same  rights  in  the  coparcenary  property  as she  would  have  had  if  she  had  been  a  son.  She  shall  be  subject  to  the  same  liabilities  and disabilities  in  respect  of  the  said  coparcenary  property  as  that  of  a  son  and  any  reference  to  a Hindu  mitakshara  coparcener  shall  be  deemed  to  include  a  reference  to  a  daughter.  But  this provision  shall  not  apply  to  a  daughter  married  before  the  commencement  of  the  Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005.

This  provision  shall  not  affect  or  invalidate  any  disposition  or  alienation  including partition  or  testamentary  disposition  of  property  which  had  taken  place  before  20th  December, 2004.Further  any  property  to  which  female  Hindu  becomes  entitled  by  virtue  of  above  provision shall  be  held  by  her  with  the  incidents  of  coparcenary  ownership  and  shall  be  regarded,  as property  capable  of  being  disposed  of  by  her  by  will  and  other  testamentary  disposition.  The provision  was  also  made  that  where  a  Hindu  dies  after  the  commencement  of  the  Hindu Succession  (Amendment)  Act  of  2005,  his  interest  in  the  property  of  a  Joint  Hindu  Family governed  by  the  Mitakshara  Law,  shall  devolve  by  testamentary  or  intestate  succession  under  the Act  and  not  by  survivorship,  and  the  coparcenary  property  shall  be  deemed  to  have  been  div

The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, an amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, received the assent from President of India on 5 September 2005 and was given effect from 9 September 2005.

It was essentially meant for removing gender discriminatory provisions regarding property rights in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. It was a revolutionary step in the field of Indian legislation regarding rights of women in India.

Amendment of section 4 of the principal Act 

In section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 , sub- section (2) has been omitted.

Amendment of Section 6 of the principal Act 

Section 6 in the principal act has been substituted by the amended provision. The amended provision under sec.6 of the principal act in essence defines as follows:-

Daughter shall have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had she been a son.

The daughter shall be subject to the same liability in the said coparcenary property as that of a son;

The daughter shall be allotted the same share as is allotted to a son.

The share of the per-deceased son or a per-deceased daughter shall be allotted to the surviving child of such per-deceased son or of such per-deceased daughter.

The share of the per-deceased child of a per-deceased son or of a per-deceased daughter shall be allotted to the child of such per-deceased child of the per-deceased son or a per-deceased daughter.

Furthermore, after the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, the pious obligation of a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great-grandfather under the Hindu law, came to an end Exception The amendment , under clause 5 of section 6 provides an exception as follows:

Nothing contained in this section shall apply to a partition, which has been effected before the 20th day of December, 2004.

Explanation.- For the purposes of this section "partition" means any partition made by execution of a deed of partition duly registered under the Registration Act, 1908 or partition effected by a decree of a court

Key features & effect :

The amendment has tremendously balanced the property rights of male and female siblings. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the law has retrospective effect, and for the daughter to become a co-sharer with her male siblings, the father would have had to be alive on 9 September 2005. The Supreme Court also ruled that the amendment was applicable to all partition suits filed before 2005 and pending when the amendment was framed.  

Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 comes into force from today

The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 (39 of 2005) comes into force from today i.e. 9th September, 2005.  The Government of India has issued notification to this effect. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act is to remove gender discriminatory provisions in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and gives the following rights to daughters under Section 6:

The daughter of a coparcener cell by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son.

The daughter has the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son.

The daughter shall be subject to the same liability in the said coparcenary property as that of a son, and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparceners shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener.

The daughter is allotted the same share as is allotted to a son

The share of the pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased  daughter shall be allotted to the surviving child of such pre-deceased son or of such pre-deceased daughter.

The share of the pre-deceased child of a pre-deceased son or of a pre-deceased daughter shall be allotted to the child of such pre-deceased child of the pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased daughter.

After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, no court shall recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great-grandfather solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, of such son, grandson or great-grandson to discharge any such debt.

Daughters are coparceners by birth in their own way from the date of enforcement of 2005 amendment.

Reasons for the conclusion

1. Section 6 of HS Act (2005) says that daughter by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son.

2. Parliament in order to remove discrimination on the basis of the gender brought amendment to the Hindu succession act in 2005. The object of the act will fail if they are held not coparceners and are deprived of their coparcenary share.

3. Daughter can challenge the alienation made after December 2004. It means that though she is coparcener from date of enforcement of 2005 amendment but her right is restricted only to the available property and not to the sold property or partitioned property, because third party rights are created so their rights will be effected so the provision is included to save them. When daughters are seeking partition they will not be allotted share in alienated properties or partitioned properties.

4. The object of the central act is to give right to married daughters and give them equal rights on par with unmarried rights given in some states including Karnataka. It was also apt to say that here that coparcenary to be retained with daughters without them it is injustice to them. Coparcenary is body of persons who have got birth right in the ancestral property.

5.  Unmarried daughters are made coparceners by three southern states Andhra in 1985, Tamil Nadu in 1989, Karnataka in 1994 and also by Maharashtra. If the interpretation as made in Prakash Vs Phulavati is accepted they will be dislodged. The object of the central act is not to dislodge the rights given to them. But to extend it to married daughters also.

6.  If it is said that daughters have to wait for death of their father then daughters are not coparceners by birth and they are only successors to their father's property. Then there is no coparcenary at all. It is death to the coparcenary and this is not the intention of the parliament.

7. Coparcenary is a body of male who are sharers by birth. Unmarried daughters are also coparceners by birth after 1985 in Andhra Pradesh, after 1989 in Tamilnadu and after 1994 in Karnataka and in whole India after 2005 all daughters married or unmarried are coparceners.

8.  Coparcener daughter can challenge the alienation made by father or by Karta after 2004 December 26 means they can file suit for partition immediately whether the father dead or alive.

9.  If there is coparcenary it is both son and daughter have equal rights.

10.  If we say that daughter has to wait for death of her father for filing partition suit means it is like reversing the reforms clock back. This is definitely not the intention of the parliament. This interpretation is against the object of the 2005 amendment.

11. If father effects partition amongst his sons, then daughters during his life time cannot challenge means it is binding on her? As she cannot sue during life time of her father?

This interpretation will amount to re-legislating by courts and against the object of the amendment.