Introduction

The present case deals with position of daughter as the senior most member of the Mitakshara Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) to be a Karta of HUF after Amendment of 2005 in Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Facts

• Mr. D R Gupta and his sons held a long-term lease on a residence in Delhi, along with movable assets and shares.
• Mr. DR Gupta passed away on 1^st October 1971, leaving behind five sons and their respective families.
• The eldest son, Mr. Kishan Mohan Gupta, assumed the role of Karta for the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF).
• Subsequently, all five sons of D R Gupta deceased, leaving the son of Kishan Gupta's younger brother to proclaim himself as the new Karta of the HUF based on his status as the eldest surviving member.
• Challenging this succession, the plaintiff contended that as the eldest daughter of Mr. Kishan Gupta, she is the most senior member of the HUF following her father and uncles.
• She participated in the family settlement by signing it, indicating her inclusion as a party to the agreement.
• Her signatures serve as evidence of her entitlement to a share in the property; otherwise, her signature would have been unnecessary.

Issue Involved

• Whether the plaintiff, being the first born amongst the co-parceners of the HUF property, would by virtue of her birth, be entitled to be its Karta?

Observations

• In the present case, the plaintiff's entitlement arose upon the demise of the eldest Karta, a fact corroborated by correspondences with the Land and Building Department.
• Undeniably, she held the status of the eldest co-parcener, making her eligible for the position of Karta within the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), as mandated by law.
• The contention that female co-parceners could inherit equally but be barred from managing the HUF property is unsubstantiated by Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 a legislation designed to ensure gender-neutral inheritance rights.
• The removal of the qualification barrier for female co-parceners to become Kartas signifies a progressive stride towards gender equality.
  • Thus, courts must vigilantly safeguard the statutory provisions that enhance female inheritance rights.
• Considering the Amendment in Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the court said that Amendment of 2005 to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which conferred coparcenary rights to the women, equivalent to that of men, is a quintessence of another reform in law relating to women empowerment and applies in this case as well even when the father dies before 2005.

Conclusion

• The SC held that the plaintiff's entitlement to her father's share in the HUF persisted post-marriage, as per Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956, render her a rightful Karta.