IBC Moratorium | Criminal Court Cannot Direct Disbursal Of Corporate Debtor's Assets To Complainant Pending CIRP: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Failure To Implead Company As Accused Renders Complaint Fatally Defective; Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Used To Cure Such Fundamental Defect: Supreme Court 'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case 'Every Lawyer Has A Duty To Act Decently': Supreme Court Modifies Suspension Of Advocate For Misconduct In Court Premises Mere Declaration Of 'Transitional Area' Under Article 243-Q(1)(a) Of Constitution Does Not Automatically Convert Rural Area Into Urban Area: Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order, Terms Non-Compliance With Natural Justice A "Travesty Of Constitutional Guarantees" 'Certiorari Is Not Appellate': Supreme Court Rejects Plea In Decades-Old Co-operative Society Membership Dispute Victim Must Authorize Settlement: Supreme Court Rules Informants Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Without Real Victim's Consent State Cannot Pick And Choose: Supreme Court Restores Right To Retrospective Regularisation For Daily Wage Employees Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment of Plaint After Commencement Of Trial Cannot Be Allowed Without Proving Due Diligence: Supreme Court Discrepancy Between Ocular Testimony And Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Order VI Rule 17 & Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter Claim Cannot Be Permitted After Trial Concludes When Party Fails To Pay Court Fees Initially: Supreme Court Nominee Holds Insurance Proceeds In Trust For Legal Heirs; Supreme Court Directs Equitable Distribution Pending Succession Proceedings PC Act | Court Must Impose Statutory Minimum Imprisonment Upon Conviction Under Sections 7 And 13(2): Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Official Caught In Factional Crossfire Retaliatory Counterblasts Cannot Be Used As Weapons Of Harassment: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Over Civil Land Dispute Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Court Must Defer Question Of Ad-Valorem Court Fee To Evidence When Possession Status Is Disputed: Supreme Court Minor Shortfall In Earnest Money Deposit Does Not Vitiate Auction Sale If It Causes No Prejudice: Supreme Court 'Flimsy And Untenable': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused In Gruesome 'Petrol-Burning' Murder Case Parity Is Not A Mechanical Mathematical Formula: Supreme Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Murder Accused Article 142 Constitution of India | Supreme Court May Protect Retiral Benefits Of Employees Whose Caste Certificates Are Invalidated In Exceptional Cases Omission Of CGST Rule 96(10) Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Supreme Court Mere Marking Does Not Prove Contents: Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Law In Testamentary Proceedings Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Determine Arbitrability Of Claims Including Excepted Matters: Supreme Court Arbitration Agreement Can Be Incorporated Into A Personal Guarantee Through A Composite Transaction: Supreme Court

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

Latest Legal News