Redefining coparcenary rights of daughters under the Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005 in light of Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020)9 SCC 1: A Case Comment

Abstract

The present case comment is the landmark judgment rendered by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, decided on the 11th August 2020. The case arose from the conflicting precedent on the interpretation of Section 6 of The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as substituted by The Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005, which conferred coparcenary rights upon a daughter in a Mitakshara Hindu joint family. The primary question before the court was whether the amended Section 6 operates retrospectively and whether the father-coparcener must be alive on the date of commencement of the Amendment Act, 9th September 2005, for the daughter to claim coparcenary rights. The Supreme Court's 2015 judgment in Prakash v. Phulavati held that the 2005 Amendment to the Hindu Succession Act is prospective, requiring the father to be alive on 9 September 2005 for the daughter to claim coparcenary rights. This interpretation was overruled in 2020 by Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, which clarified that daughters have coparcenary rights by birth, irrespective of the father's status on the amendment date. This judgment represents a transformative moment in Hindu succession law, decisively settling a decade-long legal controversy and reinforcing the constitutional guarantee of gender equality under Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India.