Seniority Must Be Calculated From the Date of Initial Appointment, Not Regularization: Madras High Court Rules Section 319 Cr.P.C. | Mere Association Not Enough for Criminal Liability: Karnataka HC Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds ₹25,000 Per Kanal Compensation for Land Acquired for Nangal-Talwara Railway Line, Dismisses Railway’s Appeal No Work No Pay Principle Not Applicable: Orissa High Court Orders Reinstatement and Full Back Wages for Wrongfully Terminated Lecturer No Assault, No Obstruction, Only Words Exchanged: Bombay High Court Quashes Charges of Obstruction Against Advocates Under Section 353 IPC Matrimonial Offences Can Be Quashed Even if Non-Compoundable, When Genuine Compromise Is Reached: J&K HC Plaintiff Entitled to Partition, But Must Contribute Redemption Share to Defendant: Delhi High Court Clarifies Subrogation Rights in Mortgage Redemption Labeling Someone A 'Rowdy' Without Convictions Infringes Personal Liberty And Reputation: Kerala High Court P&H High Court Denies Pensionary Benefits for Work-Charged Employee's Widow; Declares Work-Charged Service Not Eligible for ACP or Pension Benefits Acquittal is Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court Orders Appointment of Candidate Denied Job Over Past FIR At The Bail Stage, Culpability Is Not To Be Decided; Allegations Must Be Tested During Trial: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in SCST Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to "Secular" and "Socialist" Additions in Constitution Preamble Supreme Court Rejects Res Judicata in Land Allotment Case: Fresh Cause of Action Validates Public Interest Litigation Public Resources Are Not Privileges for the Few: Supreme Court Declares Preferential Land Allotments to Elites Unconstitutional Past antecedents alone cannot justify denial of bail: Kerala High Court Grants Bail Revenue Records Alone Cannot Prove Ownership: Madras High Court Dismisses Temple's Appeal for Injunction Humanitarian Grounds Cannot Undermine Investigation: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Interim Bail in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Imprisonment Cannot Bar Education: Bombay HC Allows UAPA Accused to Pursue LL.B. High Court Acquits Accused in Double Murder Case, Asserts ‘Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof’ Long separation and irreparable breakdown of marriage must be read as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Regulation 101 Applies to All Aided Institutions, Including Minority Ones, Says Allahabad High Court Fraud Unravels All Judicial Acts : Jharkhand High Court Orders Demolition of Unauthorized Constructions in Ratan Heights Case Suspicious Circumstances Cannot Validate a Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds 1997 Will Over 2000 Will

Gauhati High Court Upholds Equal Inheritance Rights for Daughters Under Hindu Succession Act”

11 September 2024 9:11 AM

By: Deepak Kumar


The Gauhati High Court has upheld the trial court’s decision granting a 1/8th share of the property to Smti. Mira Nandi Dutta, a daughter of the deceased Bhupendra Chandra Nandi. The appellants, who are the sons of the deceased, had challenged this decision, claiming an oral agreement among heirs that excluded daughters from the inheritance. The judgment, delivered on June 27, 2024, reaffirms the equal inheritance rights of daughters under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Late Bhupendra Chandra Nandi, who owned a plot of land measuring 2 Kathas 5 Lechas, passed away on November 13, 1991, leaving behind four sons and four daughters. Following his death, his sons demolished the old residence and constructed a multistoried commercial complex on the property. The daughters, who were already married at the time of their father’s death, were allegedly excluded from the property through an oral agreement made among the heirs on August 14, 1991.

Smti. Mira Nandi Dutta, one of the daughters, later demanded her rightful share of the property. The sons counterclaimed, asserting exclusive ownership of the property due to their financial investment in the construction of the building. The trial court decreed in favor of Smti. Mira Nandi Dutta, which led to the present appeal by the sons.

The court found no evidence to support the claim of an oral agreement excluding the daughters from their inheritance. “There is no evidence in this case to show that the daughters of late Bhupendra Chandra Nandi had agreed not to demand their shares in the suit property,” the judgment noted.

The court reiterated that daughters are Class-I heirs under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, enjoying the same rights as sons. “The marriage of a daughter has no relevance for inheriting property. As a daughter, she enjoys the same coparcenary rights as a son,” the court emphasized.

The court deemed the mutation of the property in the names of only the sons to be illegal, stressing that all Class-I heirs, including daughters, are entitled to equal shares. “The mutation of only four sons is illegal and liable to be corrected,” the court declared.

The appellants’ claim of exclusive ownership due to their financial contributions to the building was rejected. The court held that contributions to the construction did not negate the statutory share of the daughters. “In view of Section 8, the sons of late Bhupendra Chandra Nandi are not the only owners of the building. Smti. Mira Dutta Nandi also has a share in the said property,” the judgment affirmed.

Justice [Name] remarked, “Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court had correctly answered these issues in favor of Smti. Mira Nandi Dutta. Accordingly, these issues were decided in the affirmative.”

The dismissal of the appeal by the Gauhati High Court underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding equal inheritance rights for daughters under the Hindu Succession Act. By affirming the trial court’s findings, the judgment reinforces the legal framework ensuring gender equality in inheritance matters. This landmark decision is expected to have a significant impact on future cases, promoting the rightful inclusion of daughters in inheritance distributions.

Date of Decision: June 27, 2024

SRI BIJOY NANDI AND 3 ORS versus SMTI MIRA NANDI DUTTA AND 3 ORS

Similar News