SUBMITTED BY:-TANYA SHARMA

SUBMITTED TO:-MRS. BHAVNA SINGH

ENROLLMENT NO:06851103517
CLASS :-BBA LLB
SECTION :-B
FAMILY LAW ASSIGNMENT ON HINDU
SUCCESSION ACT
Hindu Succession Act, 1956

An Act to amend and codify the law relating to intestate succession among Hindus.

Citation

Act 30 of 1956

Enacted by

Parliament of India

Date enacted

17 June 1956

Status: In force

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to amend and codify the
law relating to intestate or unwilled succession, among Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs.[1] The
Act lays down a uniform and comprehensive system of inheritance and succession into one Act. The
Hindu woman's limited estate is abolished by the Act. Any property possessed by a Hindu female is
to be held by her absolute property and she is given full power to deal with it and dispose it of by
will as she likes. Parts of this Act was amended in 2005 by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act,
2005.[2]

Applicability
As per religion

This Act is applicable to the following:

(1)any person who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments including a Virashaiva, a
Lingayat or follower of the Brahmo, Prarthana or Arya Samaj;

(2)any person who is Buddhist, Sikh by religion; and

(3)to any other person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion unless it is proved that
the concerned person would not have been governed by the Hindu Law or by any custom or usage
as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Act had not been passed.

Explanation as to who shall be considered as Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs by religion has been
provided in the section:
-any child, legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jains or Sikhs by
religion;

-any child, legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is a Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh by
religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to which such
parent belongs or belonged;

-any person who is convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jain or Sikh religion.

A person shall be treated as a Hindu under the act though he may not be a Hindu by religion but is,
nevertheless , a person to whom this act applies by virtue of the provisions contained in this section.

As per tribe
However it has been provided that not withstanding the religion of any person as mentioned above,
the Act shall not apply to the members of any Scheduled Tribe within the meaning of clause (25) of
article 366 of the Constitution of India unless the Central Government, by notification in the Official
Gazette, otherwise directs. Surajmani Stella Kujur Vs. Durga Charan Hansdah-SC

In the case of males

The property of a Hindu male dying intestate, or without a will, would be given first to heirs within
Class I. If there are no heirs categorized as Class I, the property will be given to heirs within Class II. If
there are no heirs in Class II, the property will be given to the deceased's agnates or relatives
through male lineage. If there are no agnates or relatives through the male's lineage, then the
property is given to the cognates, or any relative through the lineage of females.

There are two classes of heirs that are delineated by the Act.

Class I heirs are sons, daughters, widows, mothers, sons of a pre-deceased son, widows of a pre-
deceased son, son of a, pre-deceased sons of a predeceased son, and widows of a pre-deceased son
of a predeceased son.

If there is more than one widow, multiple surviving sons or multiples of any of the other heirs listed
above, each shall be granted one share of the deceased's property. Also if the widow of a pre-
deceased son, the widow of a pre-deceased son of a pre-deceased son or the widow of a brother has
remarried, she is not entitled to receive the inheritance.

Class II heirs are categorized as follows and are given the property of the deceased in the following
order:

1.Father

2.Son's / daughter's son

3.Son's / daughter's daughter

4.Brother
5.Sister

6.Daughter's / son's son

7.Daughter's / son's daughter

8.Daughter's / daughter's son

9.Daughter's /daughter's daughter

10.Brother's son

11.Sister's son

12.Brother's daughter

In case of females
Under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956,[1] females are granted ownership of all property acquired
either before or after the signing of the Act, abolishing their "limited owner" status. However, it was
not until the 2005 Amendment that daughters were allowed equal receipt of property as with sons.
This invariably grants females property rights.

The property of a Hindu female dying intestate, or without a will, shall devolve in the following
order:

1.upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the
husband,

2.upon the heirs of the husband.

3.upon the father and mother

4.upon the heirs of the father, and

5.upon the heirs of the mother.

Amendment
The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005,[2] amended Section 4, Section 6, Section 23, Section
24 and Section 30 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. It revised rules on coparcenary property, giving
daughters of the deceased equal rights with sons, and subjecting them to the same liabilities and
disabilities. The amendment essentially furthers equal rights between males and females in the legal
system.

Certain exceptions
Any person who commits murder is disqualified from receiving any form of inheritance from the
victim.
If a relative converts from Hinduism, he or she is still eligible for inheritance. The descendants of that
converted relative, however, are disqualified from receiving inheritance from their Hindu relatives,
unless they have converted back to Hinduism before the death of the relative.

Case analysis

Shalini raut & ors v milind raut and dr. gautam raut & ors
The court held that applicants did have a share in HUF property being ancestral properties of
deceased. since coparceners jointly on the coparcenary property ,these properties could not have
been alienated without the consent of all coparceners. In coparcenary property, after the death of a
coparceners, his interest of the property would be equally divided among his heirs, by notional
partition , and other coparceners would continue to enjoy their interest in the joint family property.

Before the 2005(6) act ,daughters were only regarded as heirs to their father, and could only get the
father share of notional partition after his death, and not in his life time. Though the 1956 Act, did
try to remove the disparity that existed between Male and Female, child before 1956 it did not fully
succeed. Complete equality was brought about by the 2005 amendment act where the daughters
were given equal status to that of son, by being made more than just heirs. Daughters were now
enjoy the same right as that of son and also equally subjected to liabilities in the coparcenary
properties. This Act of 2005 has opened up new horizon for women getting their fair share in the
society. It is in tune with true spirit of our constitution and treat men and women alike.

Section 6 :Devolution of interest of coparcenary property

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:

PROVIDED that, if the deceased had left him surviving a female relative specified in class I of the
schedule or a male relative specified in that class who claims through such females 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.

explanation 1: For the purpose of this section, the interest of a Hindu Miitakshara coparcener shall
be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to him if a partition of the
property had taken place immediately before his death, irrespective of whether he was entitled to
claim partition or not.

Explanation 2:Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be constructed as enabling a
person who has separated himself from the coparcenary before the death of the deceased or any of
his heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.

Section 8:General rules of succession in the case of males

The property of a male Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the provision of this chapter-

(a)firstly ,upon the heirs, being the relative specified in class I of the schedule;
(b)secondly ,if there is no heirs of class I, then upon the heirs, being the relative specified in class II of
the schedule:

(c)thirdly , if there is no heir of any of the two classes, then upon the agnates of the deceased; and

(d)lastly , if there is no agnate, then upon the cognate of the deceased.

Case: Krishan Dev Sharma and ors. Vs. Som Dutt Sharma

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1994IVAD(Delhi)969; 58(1995)DLT424

..... village pamal held in equal shares by his widow and sons and daughters, they all being the
relatives specified in class i of the schedule to the Hindu succession act, 1956 (sections 8 and 10).
under section 19 of this act, if two or more heirs succeed together to the property of an intestate
they shall take the property per capita and not per stripes and a tenants ..... family and that the
property was held for the benefit of the coparceners in the family (see sub-section (3) of section 4 of
the act). but then we have seen above that there is no Hindu undivided family of which the plaintiff
and the defendants could be the members. the learned additional district judge had considered ail
the relevant evidence on this issue ..... for use and occupation.3. the defendants contested the suit.
written statement was filed by defendants 1 to 3 and 5 to 8. they said it was a joint Hindu family
property and it was owned by h.u.f. (Hindu undivided family) of late shri kundan lal. plaintiff and
defendants 1 to 6 are the children of kundan lal, and defendant no ..... have contacted a second
bigamous marriage with the first defendant. he then said that defendants 2 to 7 were abetting
defendants 1 and 8 and they all were advancing their claim in the house saying that it was joint
Hindu family property and each one of them had right, title and interest in the same. plaintiff said he
was exclusive owner.

Section 10.: Distribution of property among heirs in class I of the Schedule. —The property
of an intestate shall be divided among the heirs in class I of the Schedule in accordance with the
following rules:— Rule 1.— The intestate’s widow, or if there are more widows than one, all the
widows together, shall take one share. Rule 2.— The surviving sons and daughters and the mother of
the intestate shall each take one share. Rule 3.— The heirs in the branch of each pre-deceased son
or each pre-deceased daughter of the intestate shall take between them one share. Rule 4.— The
distribution of the share referred to in Rule 3—

(i) among the heirs in the branch of the pre-deceased son shall be so made that his widow (or
widows together) and the surviving sons and daughters gets equal portions; and the branch of his
predeceased sons gets the same portion;

(ii) among the heirs in the branch of the pre-deceased daughter shall be so made that the surviving
sons and daughters get equal portions.

Case : Smt. Paru Bala MahataIn and anr. Vs. Smt. Bijubala MahataIn and ors.

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : II(2006)DMC24; [2005(3)JCR232(Jhr)]

..... chand mahto with parubala has got no legal sanction and she cannot be entitled to any share in
the property of puran chand mahto under section 10(1)(a) of the Hindu successions act because
marriage was solemnized after Hindu marriage act, 1955 came into force and not prior to that.8.
learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that initially, the suit was brought for ..... ,
woman must not have a husband living at the time she was going to enter into a marriage and,
therefore, according to Hindu marriage act, a man cannot have two wives but as per section 10 of
the Hindu succession act referred the widow or may be more than one widow shall get one share
and in the instant case parubala and bijubala are two ..... but so far as this position under Hindu
marriage act is concerned, this position is there but under the Hindu succession act the position is
quite otherwise. in this connection learned counsel for the appellant submitted that so far as
succession of the property of puran chand mahto is concerned, the succession shall be governed by
the Hindu succession act and section 10 says that property of an intestate shall ..... and after making
such provision in Hindu marriage act, provision was made in Hindu succession act, 1956 that a male
Hindu can have one or more wife and this goes to show that male Hindu can have two wives at a
time and even more than that. but question here is that, no doubt such provision under section
10(1)(a) of Hindu succession act has been made

Section 11: Distribution of property among heirs in class II of the Schedule.—The property
of an intestate shall be divided between the heirs specified in any one entry in class II of the
Schedule so that they share equally.

Case: Thanthoni Naicker Vs. Kuppammal and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1973Mad274; (1973)1MLJ25

..... conclusion of the learned subordinate judge that is challenged before me in second appeal.2. the
matter has to be decided having regard to the language of section 11 of the Hindu succession act,
1956, read with the schedule. section 11 states :--'the property of an intestate shall be divided
between the heirs specified in any one entry in class ii of the schedule so that they ..... of a 'brother'
shares the property equally along with the respondents belonging to a single group or unit of 'sister'
of the deceased. this conclusion flows from the language of section 11 itself which states that the
property shall be divided between the heirs specified in the entry to that they share equally. the
expression 'they share equally' will refer to the ..... satyacharan v. urmilla, : [1970]2scr294 , and the
supreme court held that the expression 'entry' occurring in section 11 denotes all the persons
covered by the roman numerals. i have followed that decision in my judgment in Rangasami gounder
v. rakkayyee ammal, (1971) 84 mlw 724. mr. ramamurthi, the ..... sister viii. mother's father;
mother's mother ix. mother's brother; mother's sister.' the controversy is what exactly is the scope
of the expression 'entry' that occurs in section 11, whether it denotes only the group of persons
represented by the roman numerals or the persons referred to by Arabic numerals. this question
was considered by the supreme court.

Section 12: Order of succession among agnates and cognates.—The order of succession
among agnates or cognates, as the case may be, shall be determined in accordance with the rules of
preference laid down hereunder: Rule 1.— Of two heirs, the one who has fewer or no degrees of
ascent is preferred. Rule 2.— Where the number of degrees of ascent is the same or none, that heir
is preferred who has fewer or no degrees of descent. Rule 3.— Where neither heirs is entitled to be
preferred to the other under Rule 1 or Rule 2 they take simultaneously.

Section 14:Property of a female Hindu to be her absolute property.—

(1) Any property possessed by a female Hindu, whether acquired before or after the commencement
of this Act, shall be held by her as full owner thereof and not as a limited owner. Explanation.—In
this sub-section, “property” includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a female
Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of maintenance or arrears of maintenance,
or by gift from any person, whether a relative or not, before, at or after her marriage, or by her own
skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any
such property held by her as stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act.

(2) Nothing contained in sub-section (1) shall apply to any property acquired by way of gift or under
a will or any other instrument or under a decree or order of a civil court or under an award where
the terms of the gift, will or other instrument or the decree, order or award prescribe a restricted
estate in such property.

Section 15: General rules of succession in the case of female Hindus.—

(1) The property of a female Hindu dying intestate shall devolve according to the rules set out in
section 16,—

(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter)
and the husband;

(b) secondly, upon the heirs of the husband;

(c) thirdly, upon the mother and father;

(d) fourthly, upon the heirs of the father; and

(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the mother.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),—

(a) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother shall devolve, in the absence
of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter)
not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order specified therein, but upon the
heirs of the father; and

(b) any property inherited by a female Hindu from her husband or from her father-in-law shall
devolve, in the absence of any son or daughter of the deceased (including the children of any pre-
deceased son or daughter) not upon the other heirs referred to in sub-section (1) in the order
specified therein, but upon the heirs of the husband.

Case:income-tax Officer Vs. Smt. Sharda Seshadri

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Reported in : (1986)16ITD615(Delhi)

..... of challenge to the will of the deceased by the assessee, the will was not operative and the
provisions of the Hindu succession act, sections 15 and 16 were applicable and that for purpose of
family settlement the relationship of the parties must be within the ambit of ..... interest under the
provisions of the Hindu succession act and as such those rights could not be compromised in a family
settlement. moreover, the members who arrived at the settlement cannot be called members of a
family in view of the provisions of section 2(41) of the income-tax act. to our mind, this ..... . it also
meets with the contentions of the revenue that the assessee had right, title and interest to the
properties on the basis of the Hindu succession act, because the court has clearly shown that a
family settlement does not necessarily flow from such existing rights as pointed out by the
revenue.24. ..... family settlement was a device or artifice envisaged with an intent to defraud the
revenue.12. the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the Hindu succession act does not
apply to testamentary disposition, in this case, the court has recognised existence of the will and it
was on that basis that the ..... assets were acquired neither by succession, inheritance nor
devolution.7. the it had sought advice from the iac in the form of directions issued under section
144a of the act on 15-3-1983. the directed the it 'to cover this case under section 49(1)(iii) of the
1961 act, and compute the capital gain

Section 16: Order of succession and manner of distribution among heirs of a female
Hindu.—The order of succession among the heirs referred to in section 15 shall be, and the
distribution of the intestates property among those heirs shall take place according to the following
rules, namely:— Rule 1.—Among the heirs specified in sub-section

(1) of section 15, those in one entry shall be preferred to those in any succeeding entry and
those included in the same entry shall take simultaneously. Rule 2.—If any son or daughter
of the intestate had pre-deceased the intestate leaving his or her own children alive at the
time of the intestate’s death, the children of such son or daughter shall take between them
the share which such son or daughter would have taken if living at the intestate’s death.
Rule 3.—The devolution of the property of the intestate on the heirs referred to in clauses
(b), (d) and (e) of sub-section (1) and in sub-section (2) to section 15 shall be in the same
order and according to the same rules as would have applied if the property had been the
father’s or the mother’s or the husband’s as the case may be, and such person had died
intestate in respect thereof immediately after the intestate’s death.

Case: Shri Shahaji Kisan Asme and ors. Vs. Shri Sitaram Kondi Asme and ors.

Court :Mumbai

..... extended to their logical end. after examining the provisions of both the Hindu marriage act
and the Hindu succession act it would be noticed that if the right attaching to the legitimacy
created by section 16(3) of the Hindu marriage act is not extended to include the right to the
property under the Hindu succession act, section 16(3) will make no sense. in construing the
scope of a ..... entitled to succession to the estate of its father under section 8 and of mother
under section 15(1)(a) of the Hindu succession act. however, the word 'parent' connotes father
or mother ..... they may succeed to each other also. however, there is no other provision in the
Hindu succession act under which illegitimate children can succeed to the property of any other
person except their mother or themselves.12. Hindu marriage act was enacted in 1955. section
16 of the Hindu marriage act, before its amendment in 1976 provided that only those children,
who were born before ..... or to the property of any person other than the parents. section 16(3)
makes an important provision in respect of succession to the property of parents and, therefore,
it will have to be read along with the provisions of Hindu succession act. in view of the provisions
of section 16 of the Hindu marriage act, a child of a null and void marriage is also .

There are four rights under Hindu undivided family

In matters related to property laws, the term Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) if often used. An
HUF comprises all the people who have lineally descended from a common ancestor and
includes wives and unmarried daughters. Apart from Hindus, HUF laws also cover Jains, Sikhs
and Buddhists.

Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) reiterated that all assets belonging to an HUF would be
presumed to be joint property. Under the Indian law, the property belongs to everyone in the
family, equally. Only self-acquired property can be claimed by members of the undivided family.

Here are some other points to keep in mind about the concept:

-An HUF comprises a larger number of people within a family and the extended family, including
female members. Coparceners are on the other hand limited to four generations – father, sons,
grandsons and great grandsons. After 2005, women are also coparceners. Note that coparcenary
cannot start without a common male ancestor.

-The concept of HUF is not based on the property at all. A family that owns no property can also
be an HUF.

-Coparceners can ask for property partition rights. The other members can claim only through
the coparceners and have no direct claim.

-An unmarried daughter is part of an HUF. Upon her marriage, she becomes part of her
husband's HUF. However, after 2005, a woman (daughter), married or unmarried, is a
coparcener just like a son in her father's family. In her husband's HUF, she cannot be a
coparcener and can be a member only. Her share is only as much as her husband's individual
property or his share of joint property or her son's share of the same.

-A single male does not constitute an HUF.

-After the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, as well as the Hindu Succession Act,
1956, it has been understood that widows have absolute rights on the husband's property and it
cannot be stripped by remarriage or adoption. Previously, the property of a deceased husband
was could be moved ahead within the HUF.

-A member of an HUF can receive gifts from a stranger, too. This was upheld by the SC in Ref CIT
versus Satyendra Kumar (1998) 232 ITR 360(SC). A gift by mother also can also be an HUF
property.
-Under the law, after marriage, a son continues to be a member of his father's HUF and a
coparcener while he himself forms an HUF within the existing HUF. In his own HUF, he is called a
Karta.

-In case a deceased father is survived by a wife and a daughter only, the father's self-acquired
property will pass on to the wife and daughter. All ancestral property will be taken upon as part
of the HUF and can be claimed by other members of the HUF. However, if the father has a
partitioned share in the HUF in his own name, that should rightfully be passed to the wife and
daughter.

-After 2005, women can also blend their individual property into the HUF since she is a
coparcener. Previously, women in a joint family were not allowed to blend their individual
property with that of the joint family property in an HUF.

Joint Hindu family under 2 schools

There are two Schools of Hindu Laws which govern the Hindu Undivided Family(HUF):

1. Mitakshara Law

2. Dayabhaga Law

The Mitakshara Law applies total whole of India except Bengal and Assam and the Dayabhaga
Law applies to the communities like Bengalis and Assamese living in the States of Bengal and
Assam and other parts of the world. The main differences between Mitakshara and Dayabhaga
are :

Mitakshara

1. The son gets a right by birth in the joint family property. In case he is adult, he can demand
partition even during the life time of his father.

2. He has a say and can prevent his father from unauthorised alienation of ancestral properly.

3. A coparcener has no right to alienate his share in the joint family property. On his death
without male issue, his interest survives to his brother.

4. The widow of the deceased coparcener cannot enforce partition. She has a right of
maintenance.

5. The essence of a coparcenary is unity of ownership.

Dayabhaga:

1. He has no right in the joint family property so long as his father is alive.

2. The father is absolute owner of the property and can deal with it the way he likes.

3. Each adult member male or female has a right to demand partition and can alienate his/her
interest and on death his/her share will be inherited by his her heirs.
4. The widow becomes a coparcener with her husband's brother and can demand partition.

5. The essence is unity of possession and not ownership.