Skip to content


Search Results Judgments > Act:HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 1956 Section 6

Aug 10 2009

Virlkumar Natvarlal Patel Vs. Kapilaben Manilal Jivanbhai and Ors.

  • Decided on : 10-Aug-2009

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR2009Guj184

... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. It is submitted that as per Proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, the amendment to Section 6 shall not affect the transaction prior to Amendment Act 2005 i.e. 20/12/2004. It is submitted that admittedly the sale in favour of the defendant No. 5 is of dated3/3/2004 and therefore, even considering Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act (Amendment Act ... based her case solely on Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act (Amendment Act 2005). Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as amended by the Act of 2005 reads as under:Section 6:- Devolution of interest in coparcenary property:(1) On and from the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, in a joint ... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. In other words, amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act shall not affect the sale deed dated3/3/2004 executed in favour of the defendant No. 5, as the same is prior to relevant date Dated 20/12/2004. It appears that the learned trial court has not considered Proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as amended by Amendment Act ... Act, 1908 (16 of 1908) or partition effected by a decree of a Court.13. Relying upon Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as amended by Amendment Act of 2005, the original plaintiff has claimed that she has a share/right in the ancestral property i.e. disputed land in question. However, considering Proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as amended by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act ...

Jun 09 2014

Ashok Gangadhar Shedge and Others Vs. Ramesh Gangadhar Shedge, since d ...

  • Decided on : 09-Jun-2014

Court : Mumbai

... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Amendment Act is prospective or retrospective in operation? (b) Whether Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Amendment Act, applies to daughters born prior to 17.6.1956? (c) Whether Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Amendment Act, applies to daughters born after 17.6.1956 and prior to 9.9.2005? (d) Whether Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by the Amendment Act ... section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or in an altered form, or it should be totally abolished. The Commission's main aim is to end gender discrimination which is apparent in section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, by suggesting appropriate amendments to the Act. Accordingly, in the next two chapters of this report the Commission has made a broad study of section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and the Hindu Succession State(Amendment) Acts ... section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, by suggesting appropriate amendments to the Act. Accordingly, in the next two chapters of this report the Commission has made a broad study of section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and the Hindu Succession State(Amendment) Acts of Andhra Pradesh (1986), Tamil Nadu(1989), Maharashtra(1994) and Karnataka (1994) and the Kerala Joint Family System (Abolition) Act. The Acts ...

Sep 24 1987

Controller Of Estate Duty Vs. Vipin K. Nagori

  • Decided on : 24-Sep-1987

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) - Ahmedabad

Reported in : (1988)24ITD51(Ahd.)

... Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 has not been taken away by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ; rather the same is extended. Reliance can be placed on Section 6 of General Clauses Act, 1887. Therefore, on the commencement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the right which was there with the Hindu female or woman under the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 is there and is extended vide Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956 but the right which was given to her under the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 has not been taken away by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ; rather the same is extended. Reliance can be placed on Section 6 of General Clauses Act, 1887. Therefore, on the commencement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the right which was there with the Hindu female or woman under the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act ... Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 is repealed on the commencement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 but the right which was given to her under the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 has not been taken away by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ; rather the same is extended. Reliance can be placed on Section 6 of General Clauses Act, 1887. Therefore, on the commencement of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ...

May 22 1987

Dr. Rajah Sir M.A. Muthiah Vs. Wealth-Tax Officer

  • Decided on : 22-May-1987

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) - Madras

Reported in : (1987)22ITD62(Mad.)

... property of the Hindu undivided family devolved on his legal heirs in terms of proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and this has been duly accounted for by the accountable person in accordance with Section 7(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The estate duty attributable to the estate passing on death was Rs. 8,57,050. The properties of the Hindu undivided family were ... is to be assumed that a partition had in fact taken place between the deceased and the other corparoeners immediately before his death in view of Explanation 1 to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. This assumption which the statute requires to be made, that a partition had in fact taken place, must permeate the entire process of ascertaining of the ultimate share of ... M.A.M. Ramaswamy -- Son On the death of one of the coparceners, namely Kumararajah M.A.M.Muthiah Chettiar on 24-1-1970 by virtue of proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 his undivided 1/3rd share in the HUF properties devolved on his wife Kumararani Srat. Meenakshi Achi and mother Rani Meyyammai Achi. In computing the net wealth of ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956. This assumption which the statute requires to be made, that a partition had in fact taken place, must permeate the entire process of ascertaining of the ultimate share of the heirs through all its stages. Secondly the issue regarding: deduction of the estate duty liability from out of the estate passing on the death of the deceased according to Section ...

Oct 14 1970

P. Govinda Reddy and Ors. Vs. Golla Obulamma

  • Decided on : 14-Oct-1970

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1971AP363

... of law under Hindu Succession Act of 1956 in relation to the nature of father's self-acquired property in the hands of a number of his sons on its devolution on them on his death by rule of succession. Whereas according to the Mitakshara Law they would have would have held it as joint tenants, under Section 19(b) of the Hindu Succession Act they hold ... of each of the coparcenrs therein become specified only on partition. It is no according to Mitkahsara Law.28. What then is the impact of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act on this legal position?29. Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, as already stated, is divided into two parts and each part has inserting appointed province. The first part reclines the operation of Mitakshara ... death might have taken place after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act. In fact it, in express terms. prohibits the operation of Act 30 of 1956 to such cases. But this prohibition as is obvious from the language of the proviso which is of vital importance is not unqualified. In fact that section read as a whole would show that the rule ... High Court on the contraction placed on Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as the case fell within the proviso of the said section. The learned Judge expressed his view on the scheme of Section 6 thus:'Both parts of Section 6 namely, the opening section and the proviso are substantive provisions enacted by the Hindu Succession Act for the purpose of modifying the customary Hindu Law and creating new heirs ...

Jun 30 1969

Govindram Mihamal Vs. Chetumal Villardas

  • Decided on : 30-Jun-1969

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1970Bom251; (1970)72BOMLR653; 1970MhLJ59

... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, is to maintain the Mitakshara coparcenary and the devolution of property by survivorship among the members of the coparcenary which is a special and distinguishing feature of the Mitakshara joint Hindu family. Since Section 4 of that Act says that the customary Hindu Law shall be deemed to have been overridden to fie extent of the provisions enacted in the Hindu Succession Act, ... Mithamal, the father of the plaintiff, as a karta of the joint Hindu family, advanced a loan to the defendant on 19-6-1950 under a sarkat note. The loan was renewed br acknowledged by another sarkat note, dated 9-6-1953, There was a third sarkat note, dated 9-6-1956. After their renewal Mithamal died in or about February 1958. The plaintiff, ... Act, the customary Hindu Law prevalent before the passing of this Act continues to operate in the field which is not covered by the new Act.12. Section 6 is introduced in the Hindu Succession Act for the purpose of effecting a change in the normal mode in which the joint family property used to pass from one person to another in a joint Hindu family. In a joint Hindu ... effect. It also follows from the provisions of Section 4 that if a particular matter is not covered or is not provided by the 'Act, the customary Hindu Law prevalent before the passing of this Act continues to operate in the field which is not covered by the new Act.12. Section 6 is introduced in the Hindu Succession Act for the purpose of effecting a change in ...

Mar 19 2010

Pushpalatha N.V. W/o Nemraj Vs. V. Padma Widow of Vasantha Kumar D.N., ...

  • Decided on : 19-Mar-2010

Court : Karnataka

... 83. The Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 was enacted by the Karnataka Legislature inserting Section 6(A), (B) and (C) in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Central Act 30/1956 after Section 6. The State Act received the assent of the President on 28.7.1994 and it became Karnataka Act 23/1994. By the aforesaid Amendment Act for the ... Act. No female member including daughter was a member of Mitakshara co-parcenary. Therefore, the said provision did not confer any right on the daughter.83. The Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 was enacted by the Karnataka Legislature inserting Section 6(A), (B) and (C) in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Central Act 30/1956 after Section 6. The State Act ... Section 6(A), (B) and (C) in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Central Act 30/1956 after Section 6. The State Act received the assent of the President on 28.7.1994 and it became Karnataka Act 23/1994. By the aforesaid Amendment Act for the first time equal rights to daughters in co-parcenary property was conferred by the Karnataka State Legislature. The said law was repugnant to Section 6 ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Central Act 30/1956 after Section 6. The State Act received the assent of the President on 28.7.1994 and it became Karnataka Act 23/1994. By the aforesaid Amendment Act for the first time equal rights to daughters in co-parcenary property was conferred by the Karnataka State Legislature. The said law was repugnant to Section 6. However, as the said Amendment Act ...

Jul 08 2009

Miss. R. Kantha D/o. Sri. Doddarmaiah Reddy represented by G.P.A. hold ...

  • Decided on : 08-Jul-2009

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR2010Kant27; ILR2009KAR3699; 2009(6)KarLJ606; 2009(4)KCCRSN242; 2009AIRKarR218.

... to seek partition of co-parcenary property under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (as amended by Act 39 of 2005). The said Act is a law relating to intestate succession and regulates succession to properties of all Hindus. The only provision under the Act, which provides for testamentary succession also is Section 30. Under that Section a Hindu is permitted to dispose of any of his ... the Act And on the other hand would nullify its declared object.8. The next issue for consideration is incidental to the bove. The petitioner claims a right to seek partition of co-parcenary property under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (as amended by Act 39 of 2005). The said Act is a law relating to intestate succession and regulates succession to ... Section 6-A of the Act.The Counsel, however, would submit that the ratio of that decision ought not to feller the entertainment of the present petition as the ground of challenge cannot be said to be identical.5. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 dealing with intestate succession among Hindus came into force on 17th June, 1956. This Act brought about changes in the law of succession ... Section 6(1)(c) of Act 39 of 2005 is irrational and has no nexus with the object of the Act And on the other hand would nullify its declared object.8. The next issue for consideration is incidental to the bove. The petitioner claims a right to seek partition of co-parcenary property under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (as amended by Act ...

Jan 22 2004

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

  • Decided on : 22-Jan-2004

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2004KAR1930; 2004(6)KarLJ146

... 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 ... Section 8(1)(d) of the Mysore Act does 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 ... 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 ... that the Mysore Act of 1933 is not repealed by Hindu Succession Act of 1956 and the Mysore Act of 1933 is still operative. In the context of such observations the ruling of the Single Judge in MUNISWAMY v. SMT. LAXMAKKA, : AIR1989Kant67 taking a contra view that Section 8 of the Mysore Act of 1933 is inconsistent with the provisions of Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act is not ...

Oct 16 1986

Basti Venkatesh Shanthappa Shanbogue Vs. Narasimha Kamath

  • Decided on : 16-Oct-1986

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1986KAR4172

... Thus under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1/4 th share of Manjunath Kamath was inherited by his widow Ramani by succession. It is also undisputed that Annappa Kamath died in 1961 or 1962 leaving behind his daughter-in-law Ramani alias Yeshoda. Therefore as per Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, his l/4th share also was got by Ramani alias Yeshoda by succession. Thus ... liability.16. These decisions relied on by Shri Hande do not appear to have considered the implication of succession by the female hair under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act. As already indicated above, the share which a female gets under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act is her separate property. Once it is the separate property of a female heir, then the Karta of ... Ramani by succession. It is also undisputed that Annappa Kamath died in 1961 or 1962 leaving behind his daughter-in-law Ramani alias Yeshoda. Therefore as per Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, his l/4th share also was got by Ramani alias Yeshoda by succession. Thus Ramani alias Yeshoda became the owner of half share in the suit property by succession as ... Hindu Succession Act is her separate property. Once it is the separate property of a female heir, then the Karta of the family who can represent the members of the joint family only in regard to joint family properties, cannot eater into a transaction so as to affect the separate property or share of the female heir which she got under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //