R.S.A. No. 2732 of 2007 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 2732 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.7.2009 Smt. Santosh ....Appellant Versus Kapoora and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: Mr. A.K. Goyat, Advocate, for the appellant. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) CM No. 7938-C of 2009 For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed, order dated 19.5.2009 is recalled and the case is restored to its original number. RSA No. 2732 of 2007 This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.2.2007 passed by the learned Courts below, vide R.S.A. No. 2732 of 2007 (O&M) -2- which the suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant has been ordered to be dismissed. The plaintiff/appellant brought a suit for declaration, and permanent injunction by claiming herself to be a coparcener, having interest in the property of her father-in-law, which was said to have been acquired by him under a 'Will'. The learned Courts below have non-suited the plaintiff/appellant, by holding that neither the property was ancestral in the hands of respondent No. 1 nor plaintiff/appellant could be said to be coparcener having any interest in the property. Learned counsel for the appellant contends, that the appeal raises the following substantial questions of law: - “1. Whether female members are members of Joint Hindu Family and are necessary party to any family settlement of Joint Hindu Family? 2. Whether the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Courts below is illegal, ultra vires, void and without jurisdiction?” The learned counsel for the appellant contends, that the substantial questions of law deserve to be answered in favour of the appellant, as the female can be member of Joint Hindu Family. There can be no dispute with this proposition, but it is equally settled that the female cannot be coparcener in ancestral property, to claim her right (prior to amendment giving right to daughters). The amended law is not applicable in this case, as is sought to be contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. The judgment and decree passed by the learned Courts below R.S.A. No. 2732 of 2007 (O&M) -3- is, therefore, as per settled and established principles of Hindu Law. The judgment and decree, therefore, cannot be said to be illegal or void as claimed. The substantial questions of law raised, therefore, are answered against the appellant. No merit. Dismissed. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge July 23, 2009 R.S.