Skip to content


Jan 11 2007 (HC)

Lalitaben Wd/O Baldevbhai Manibhai Suthar Vs. Niruben Ramanbhai Suthar ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2007)3GLR2332

..... daughter would not be entitled to succeed to anything. his submission is that before coming into force of hindu succession act, 1956, specially section 6 or section 8 of the said act, daughter was not entitled to any share in the property. his further submission is that the old, orthodox hindu law clearly provided that a daughter would only be entitled to maintenance and nothing more and in case ..... widow, daughter, widow of the predeceased son and other females, who, otherwise, had no right in the property before coming into force of the hindu succession act. 10. section 6 of the hindu succession act provides that in case there is a joint hindu family property, the property would be succeeded by other co-parceners of the family and they would enjoy the joint possession over the same. clause ..... , there would be a deemed partition and the property would devolved upon by succession and not by survivorship. section 6 would govern the field of succession after coming into force of hindu succession act and would not reopen the subject which already came to an end. 11. section 8 of the hindu succession act provides natural course of succession, it provides different heads and different class of the successors-cum-heirs. widow .....

Tag this Judgment!
Apr 15 2009 (HC)

Smt. Lalita Devi Daughter of Jaglal Mistry and ors. Vs. Sarswan Kumar ...

Court : Patna

Reported in : 2009(57)BLJR2517

..... became separate property of each son?(ii) whether mitakshara joint family property having been partitioned by sons after the death of father, succession of the property of the son after his death will be governed by section 8 of hindu succession act, 1956 or section 6 thereof?13. on the aforesaid questions, learned counsel for the defendants-appellants argued that admittedly jaglal mistry got the suit properties in ..... father madhir mistry in the year 1991, sons of jaglal mistry (defendant no. 1) not being class-i heirs of madhir mistry as per the schedule of hindu succession act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' for the sake of brevity') cannot inherit the said properties.14. learned counsel for the appellants further argued that the properties being self acquired properties of madhir mistri ..... joint family property and each of them had right to transfer his share in the land. he further submitted that the plaintiffs father left behind daughter also and hence section 6 of the act had no application. in this regard he relied upon three decisions of the hon'ble apex court in case of bhanwar singh v. puran reported in : air2008sc1490 ; (ii) in ..... 'ble apex court in case of p. periasami v. p. periathambi reported in 1996 p.l.j.r. (sc) 67. he also referred to section 8 of the act, according to which the property of a male hindu dying inestate shall devolve according to the provisions of this chapter upon the heirs, being the relative specified in class-i of the schedule and .....

Tag this Judgment!
Nov 24 1993 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. H.H. Rajendrasinghji, Maharaja of Rajpi ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1995]213ITR225(Bom)

..... hands of rajendrasinghji during his lifetime. 15. the deceased rajendrasinghji died on february 2, 1963. since this is after the coming into force of the hindu succession act of 1956, devolution of rajpipla palace is governed by section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956. from the facts on record, it is clear that rajendrasinghji, on his death, left behind, apart from his son raghubirsinghji, also his widow and two ..... daughters. under section 6 of the hindu succession act ordinarily, when a male hindu dies after the commencement of the hindu succession act, 1956, having at the time of his death an interest in a mitakshara coparcenary property, his interest in the property would devolve by survivorship upon ..... family. but in respect of the interest of rajendrasinghji in the said hindu undivided family property, a portion of which devolved by intestate succession on raghubirsinghji under the hindu succession act of 1956, raghubirsinghji would be entitled to it as an individual inheriting the property under section 6 of the hindu succession act. the income, therefore, which accrues to raghubirsinghji in respect of the said property will have to be proportionately .....

Tag this Judgment!
Apr 10 1968 (HC)

Chinnappa Gounder and anr. Vs. Valliammal

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1969Mad187

..... share of the suit properties by virtue of the proviso to section 6 read with section 8 of the hindu succession act of 1956. the reason is that though the father-in-law of the respondent and the first appellant constituted an hindu undivided family, by virtue of the provision contained in the proviso to section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956, his undivided interest in the joint family properties would devolve by ..... way of succession and will not go by way of survivorship. if that be the case, his interest in ..... the various heirs get under the hindu succession act 1956 and therefore there is no justification whatever for importing the position under the earlier act by way of analogy into the position under the 1956 act.4. mr. sivamani, drew my attention to the provisions contained in the hindu adoptions and maintenance act, 1956 and particularly to sections 19, 21 and 22. section 19 of that act deals with the right of a .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jun 16 1980 (HC)

Venubai Widow of Bajirao Ingale and anr. Vs. Saraswatibai Alias Sumitr ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1980MhLJ907

..... 's estate, provided however that she shall have the same right of claiming partition as a male owner......'.the hindu succession act, 1956.section 6. '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 ..... , carved out in her favour her deceased husband's interest in the joint family properties, make a subsequent claim, based on section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956, to a share in the interest of another coparcener having, at the time of his death, an interest in the remaining properties of the joint family ?2. ..... the date on which she claimed partition'.8. the position and status of a hindu widow, indeed of hindu women in general, received radical impetus by the enactment in 1956 of the hindu succession act (hereinafter the 1956 act). though his enactment, by its own section 31, repealed the 1937 act, it did so only after consolidating and further extensively augmenting the rights of female hindus ..... . this 1956 act amended and codified the law relating to succession amongst hindu, in the process effecting and bringing about far-reaching .....

Tag this Judgment!
Apr 24 1994 (HC)

Devisingh S/O Balaramsingh Raghuwanshi and ors. Vs. Smt. Shailabai Wd/ ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1996(2)BomCR183

..... 1/3rd share would devolve on the plaintiff i.e. his mother being his only class-i heir under the schedule to the hindu succession act, 1956 as per the proviso to section 6 of the said act.33. the above construction of section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956 is supported by the judgment of the full bench of this court in the case of shushilabai v. narayan gopalrao, 1975 mah ..... of rajendrasingh in the said property would be 1/3rd and that of his wife i.e. the plaintiff would be 2/3rd in view of the provisions of section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956. therefore, if at all, it is his aforesaid 1/3rd share in the property allotted to him on family partition effected on 1-10-1952 which the deceased ..... it may then be seen that when jagdishsingh, the son of the deceased rajendrasingh died, hindu succession act, 1956 had come into force. section 6 of the said act envisages devolution of interest in coparcenery property of a male hindu who dies after the commencement of the said act. explanation 1 to said section 6 provides for determination of his interest in the coparcenery property at the time of his death ..... son who was not included in class-i heir in the schedule under the hindu succession act, 1956. the said case was concerned with the general rule of inheritance under section 8 of the said act. we are however concerned in the instant case with the operation of section 6 of the said act because the share of jagjitsingh in the ancestral property in the hands of his father .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 29 2001 (HC)

Ramanlal Vs. Smt. Heeramani and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : 2002(5)WLC846; 2003(2)WLN332

..... the mother of defendant no. 1 was not entitled for any share in the property. 16. first of all it will be relevant to quote section 6 of the hindu succession act 1956. 17. proviso to section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956 provides as under:-'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 female relative, the interest of the deceased in the mitakshara coparcenery property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession ..... : vidyaben v. jagdishchandra nandshankar bhatt and ors. (6), and the division bench judgment of orissa high court delivered in : hemalata dei v. umashankari moharna and ors. (7), wherein it was held that when there is only one male heir then there is no bar under section 23 of the hindu succession act, 1956. 58. the learned counsel for the appellant relied upon ..... 1 that after death of father of defendant no. 1, all properties became his personal properties in view of the sections 6 and 8 of the act of 1956, but it is true that shares are calculated as per the provisions of hindu succession act. 20. so far as question of title of 'raman mansion' is concerned, the plaintiff stated that this property was .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 22 1974 (HC)

Sushilabai Ramchandra Kulkarni Vs. Narayanrao Gopalrao Deshpande and o ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1975Bom257; (1975)77BOMLR558; 1975MhLJ682

..... this division bench of this court has referred to the full bench the following two questions for determination:(1) is the scope of the fiction in the explanation of section 6 of the hindu succession act, 1956 as wide as was held in rangubai v. laxman, : air1966bom169 , and whether the view taken in rangubai's case that as a result of the notional partition ..... of the hindu succession act assumes that ..... hindu undivided family after the coming into force of the hindu succession act, 1956, his share in the income that accrued form firms in which he had been a partner as karta, devolves by succession on his own heirs, and is not assessable as income of the hindu undivided family. for the purpose of computation or determination of the share of the male hindu explanation 1 to section 6 ..... contemplated by the proviso to section 6 of the hindu succession act, the shares of persons other than the deceased coparcener also become fixed as if a partition had taken place during the .....

Tag this Judgment!
Jan 22 2004 (HC)

Smt. Puttamma and ors. Vs. H.K. Ramegowda

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2004KAR1930; 2004(6)KarLJ146

..... share in the property has been rejected concurrently by the courts below. the said finding is sound and proper.6. the provisions of section 8 of mysore hindu law women's rights act 1933 (hereinafter called mysore act 1933) and 6 of hindu succession act, 1956 are reproduced hereunder for convenient reference.'section 8: certain females entitled to shares at partition :-(1 (a)at a partition of joint family property between ..... not also arise. this would mean that section 8(1)(d) of the mysore act has been superseded by the proviso to section 6 of the 1956 act to the extent stated.10. the supreme court has laid down that the provisions of section 8(1)(d) of the mysore act are superceded by the provisions of section 6 of the hindu succession act. in the instant case we are concerned with the ..... provisions of section 8(1)(a) and 8(1 .....

Tag this Judgment!
Aug 20 1971 (HC)

P.C. Unnikrishna Menon and ors. Vs. Kozhikkott Narayana Menon

Court : Kerala

Reported in : AIR1972Ker198

..... person succeeding to the interest of a member dying after the commencement of hindu succession act. i have to see how far the courts below are right in this approach to the question.3. section 6 of the hindu succession act 1956 reads as follows:'6. when a male hindu dies after the commencement of this act, having at the time of his death an interest in a mitakshara coparcenery ..... is inapplicable to a case of possession by persons claiming to inherit a share of a hindu under section 6 or 7 of the hindu succession act, 1956. apparently reliance has been placed upon certain passages in mulla's hindu law for this view. in the case of an alienee from a hindu coparcener the position is apparently different. mulla at page 293 of his treatise on ..... property his interest in the property shall devolve by survivorship upon the surviving members of the coparcenery and not in accordance with this act:-- provided that, if ..... hindu law 13th edition observes in regard to this as follows:--'if the purchaser (from an alienating .....

Tag this Judgment!
Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //