Skip to content


Search Results Judgments > Act:HINDU SUCCESSION ACT, 1956 1956 Section 6 Page:2

Sep 18 2007

Sugalabai Vs. Gundappa A. Maradi and Ors.

  • Decided on : 18-Sep-2007

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR2007KAR4790; 2008(2)KarLJ406

... what was under consideration was Sections 6 and 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, whereas in the case on hand, this court considered the case of the parties in the light of the Karnataka Amendment Act of 1990, by which Section 6-A was brought in by way of amendment to the Principal Act, and by virtue of Section 6-A(b), the daughter also ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, the said succession cannot be reopened and the vesting which has taken place, cannot be divested. Following the aforesaid law laid down by this court, in the cases on hand, the repugnancy of the provision of Section 6-A(d) of the Karnataka Act will take effect from the date on which the Central Amendment Act ... Amendment Act, 1990 coming into force or afterwards, in view of the amendment affected to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, (for short 'the Principal Act') by the State of Karnataka by The Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 (Karnataka Act No. 23/1994), with effect from 30th July 1994 and the subsequent amendment brought to the Principal Act by the Central Government by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, ... Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005 it has been clearly stated that having regard to the need to render social justice to women, it is proposed to remove the discrimination contained in Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 by giving equal rights to daughters amongst coparcener's property as the sons have. It is this goal that has also led to Section 23 of the Principal Act ...

Aug 10 2004

Alamelu Ammal, Vs. Tamizh Chelvi,

  • Decided on : 10-Aug-2004

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2004)3MLJ620

... which earlier devolved on the plaintiffs 1 and 2 as well as the first defendant under section 6 read with 8 of the Hindu Succession Act on the death of Subramaniam would be altered by reason of insertion of section 29-A of the Hindu Succession Act,1956?4. Before considering the above questions, it would be relevant to consider the property standing in ... been affected by section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and, therefore, after the Act, when the son inherited the property in the situation contemplated by section 8, he does not take it as Kartha of his own undivided family but takes it in his individual capacity. Therefore the properties which devolved on Subramaniam under section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act are ... section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act would get altered and their rights in the family properties have to be redetermined by applying the provisions of section 29-A of the Hindu Succession Act. Therefore we hold that notwithstanding the fact that the properties had devolved on the heirs under sections 6 and 8 of the Hindu Succession Act prior to the insertion of section 29-A of the Act ... Act and in all other cases the necessary implication is section 29-A of the Hindu Succession Act would apply and consequently, the shares, if any, devolved on the members of the family under section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act would get altered and their rights in the family properties have to be redetermined by applying the provisions of section 29-A of the Hindu Succession Act ...

Sep 24 1986

Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. S. Harish Chandra

  • Decided on : 24-Sep-1986

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1987)59CTR(All)56; [1987]167ITR230(All); [1987]30TAXMAN100(All)

... Duty Act.9. The accountable person had relied on Explanation 1 to the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, to substantiate her case that although she was living with her husband, on the basis of the concept of notional partition because of the fiction incorporated in Explanation 1 to the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, her ... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, to substantiate her case that although she was living with her husband, on the basis of the concept of notional partition because of the fiction incorporated in Explanation 1 to the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, her share was only one-half of one-half which had been received by late Justice Harish Chandra.10. Section ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956, to substantiate her case that although she was living with her husband, on the basis of the concept of notional partition because of the fiction incorporated in Explanation 1 to the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, her share was only one-half of one-half which had been received by late Justice Harish Chandra.10. Section 5 of the Estate Duty Act ... Consequently, there was no coparcenary, and since there was no coparcenary, neither could Section 6 nor Explanation 1 apply. In such a case, the widow or the accountable person could not by taking advantage of Explanation 1 to the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, claim that she had one-fourth share. The question of notional partition ...

Feb 11 2013

KRISHNA GUPTA AND ANR. Vs. M/S RAJINDER NATH & CO HUF AND ORS

  • Decided on : 11-Feb-2013

Court : Delhi

... decree proceedings in terms of the provisions of Section 6-A inserted in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by the Hindu Succession(Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990, that was notified on 30.7.1994. discussing After the aims and objects that weighed with the Karnataka legislature for amending the Hindu Succession Act, 1990 by inserting Section 6-A to 6-C, which was for ensuring that unmarried ... of the substituted Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the 1956 Act) as amended in the year 2005, which came into force on 09.09.2005(hereinafter referred to as `the 2005 Act). The plaintiffs claim that the amended Section 6 of the Act provides that the daughter of a coparcener in the joint Hindu family governed by ... Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act as amended by Act 39 of 2005, the daughters, who have born only after 2005 are to be treated as coparceners and not otherwise. The learned counsel for both parties have not raised any other points in this appeal. xxx 7. The above section was amended with an intention to remove the discrimination as contained in S.6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 ... Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as originally enacted, which contained the non-obstante clause, with reference to Section 50 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, that lays down the general order of succession from males, the learned Single Judge had observed that due to sub-section (2) to Section 4 of the 1956 Act, rule of succession under the said Act ...

Sep 19 1975

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-I Vs. Babubhai Mansukhbhai (Deceas ...

  • Decided on : 19-Sep-1975

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : [1977]108ITR417(Guj)

... Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the income from assets inherited by a son from his father from whom he has separated by partition cannot be assessed as the income of the Hindu undivided family of the son. Beg J., delivering the judgment of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, has referred to the provision as it prevailed prior to the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act ... intestate succession, as the case may be, under the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act. It will noticed that both section 6 and section 30 deal with the undivided share of a Hindu in a Mitakshara coparcenary property. They do not deal with his individual self-acquired property. Therefore, it is obvious that what has been provided for in section 6 and section 30 of the Hindu Succession Act ... the Hindu undivided family applying the well-recognised principle of Hindu law that the property left by the grandfather in the hands of the father is ancestral property in which the grandson has a right by birth. It was on these facts that the Allahabad High Court held that in view of the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, ... any of the sections of the Hindu Succession Act which derogates from the provision of Hindu law regarding the property which comes to a Hindu son in a Mitakshara family on the death of his father by succession. 5. Under section 6 provision is made for devolution of interest in coparcenary property. When a male Hindu dies after the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, having at ...

Jan 11 2007

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

  • Decided on : 11-Jan-2007

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2007)3GLR2332

... 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 ... the succession opened in the year 1947. If that is the true factual position, the legal position would be that in the year 1947, the 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, ... Hindu Succession Act, 1956, succession amongst Hindu was governed by Sruti, Smruti and orthodox Hindu Law. Mansmruti was the source to provide that what would be the mode of succession. Mitakshara or Banaras law, Daybhag or Bengal Hindu Law were also to govern the succession. In Gujarat, succession could be governed by Mayukha School of Hindu Law. In each of the laws, daughter or widow of the deceased was not entitled to succession ... 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 (b) of Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act provides that if a co-parcener-cum-owner in the Joint Hindu Family leaves any female heir as provided under Section ...

Nov 24 1993

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

  • Decided on : 24-Nov-1993

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : [1995]213ITR225(Bom)

... 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 ... Hindu Succession Act of 1956 will have to be applied. Rajpipla Palace therefore will have to be considered as a Hindu undivided family property in the 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 ... who, with his wife, sons and daughter constituted a Hindu undivided family at the time of his death. His heirs including his son succeeded to the properties left by the deceased under section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The question was whether the income from the property ... Hindu Succession Act of 1956, this property will have to be considered as a Hindu undivided family property in his hands, the property devolving on him on the death of his father in April, 1951, before the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Hence the provisions of the Hindu law as applicable prior to the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act of 1956 ...

Aug 12 1994

Ved Parkash Loona Vs. Income-Tax Officer

  • Decided on : 12-Aug-1994

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) - Amritsar

Reported in : (1994)50ITD105(Asr.)

... sight of the provision, contained in the Hindu Succession Act, which the assessee had reiterated, again and again, before the authorities. Since a consideration of the provision is necessary for reaching a finding in this appeal, we would reproduce Section 6 and Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act : "6. When a male Hindu dies after the commencement of this Act, having at the time of his death ... on article 308 of Mull's Hindu Law (Fourteenth edition) as also on Section 12 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, which prohibits appointment of a guardian in respect of undivided interest in joint family property of a minor managed by an adult member of the family. As per the proviso to the said section, the provision does not affect ... appeal, we would reproduce Section 6 and Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act : "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 members of the coparcenary and not in accordance with this Act : Provided that, if ... be treated as a partition under the Income-tax Act even though under Hindu law there has been a partition--total or partial." 34. It is difficult to dispute that in the notional partition provided in Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, no physical division can take place as envisaged in Section 171 of the Act. Therefore, no claim for recording a finding of ...

Oct 12 1987

Babu Ningappa Yalgundri and Ors. Vs. Arunkumar alias Basappa and Ors.

  • Decided on : 12-Oct-1987

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : AIR1988Kant139; ILR1987KAR3590

... so far as Sec. 12 of the Act is concerned.23. Mr.: Mandgi, learned Counsel for appellants, has contended that once it is established that Ningappa died on 10-11-1956 after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, his interest in the undivided coparcenaries would devolve not by survivorship but by inheritance in accordance with the proviso to Sec. 6 of the said Act and therefore ... Ningappa died on 10-11-1956 after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, his interest in the undivided coparcenaries would devolve not by survivorship but by inheritance in accordance with the proviso to Sec. 6 of the said Act and therefore it must be held that the nature of t he family ceased to be that of a joint Hindu family because Nemikka being a ... of her husband and was in possession of the same when the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force. By virtue of S. 14(1) of the Act, her limited estate became a full and absolute estate and she became the full owner of the properties. It was thereafter that on 13-7-1956. She adopted Ramalingam Approximately a year after the adoption, she settled 9 ... heirs of deceased Ningappa under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956? 13. Whether the plaint is property valued for purpose of Court-fee? 14. Whether the prayer for partition would offend the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947? 15. Whether the plaint has to be rejected under S. 132 of the Mysore Land Revenue Act, 1964 for non-production ...

Apr 27 2012

Ms. Nayan Bharti Vs. Dr. S.S. Srivastava and Others

  • Decided on : 27-Apr-2012

Court : Delhi

... The defendant No.1 further asserts that the plaintiff has placed reliance on Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in support of her contention that her father died intestate and the brothers and sisters are entitled to equal share as per Section 6 of the aforesaid Act, however, Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would not apply since Section 6 deals only with coparcenary property, whereas the suit property is the self- ... intents and purposes. 5. The plaintiff claims that all the surviving legal representatives were entitled to an equal share i.e. one-fifth each, as per the provisions of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in the estate of late Shri Ram Singh Srivastava. The plaintiff having learnt from her relatives that the defendant No.1, who was in occupation of the suit ... support of her submission that the instant suit for partition is barred by limitation; and is even otherwise not maintainable in view of the fact that the provisions of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 relied upon by the plaintiff have no application to the present suit. Dr. Pappu contended that the ratio of the decision in Maha Singhs case (supra) is ... . 26. As regards the plea of the defendant No.1 that the plaint is liable to be rejected in view of the reliance placed by the plaintiff on Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, there is no merit in the said plea. The stand of the plaintiff all along has been that her father had died intestate and she was entitled to ...

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