Source: http://peractolegal.com/the-hindu-succession-act-1956/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 20:57:53+00:00

Document:
(1) This Act may be called the Hindu Succession Act 1956.
(a) to any person, who is a Hindu by religion in any of its forms or developments including a Virashaiva, a Lingayat or a follower of the Brahmo, Parathana or Arya Samaj.
(c) to any of other person who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi or Jew by religion unless it is proved that any such persons would not have been governed by the Hindu law or by custom or usage as part of that law in respect of any of the matters dealt with herein if this Act had not been passed.
(a) any child, legitimate or illegitimate, both of whose parents are Hindus, Buddhists, Jainas or Sikhs by religion.
(b) any child, legitimate or illegitimate one of whose parent is a Hindu, Buddhists, Jaina or Sikh by religion and who is brought up as a member of the tribe, community, group or family to which such parent belongs or belonged.
(c) any person who is convert or re-convert to the Hindu, Buddhist, Jaina or Sikh religion.
(3) The expression “Hindu” in any portion of this Act shall be construed as if it included a person who, through not a Hindu by religion, is, nevertheless, a person to whom this Act applies by virtue of the provisions contained inn this section.
The petitioner’s mother after marrying the petitioner’s father changed her religion and name. The petitioner was not able to prove that she was a member of the Hindu community as she could not show bona fide intention of being converted to the Hindu faith accompanied by conduct or unequivocally expressing that intention, thereby failing to avail the opportunity of section 2(b) of the Act; Sapna Jacob v. State of Kerala, AIR 1993 Ker 75.
Under clause (f) of sub-section (1) of section (3) agnates of deceased are also heirs; Basanti Devi v. Raviprakash Ramprasad Jaiswal, (2007) 11 SCR 444.
(2) Any property to which a female Hindu becomes entitled by virtue of sub­-section (1) shall be held by her with the incidents of coparcenary ownership and shall be regarded, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force in, as property capable of being disposed of by her by testamentary disposition.
(c) the share of the pre-deceased child of a pre-deceased son or of a pre­-deceased daughter, as such child would have got had he or she been alive at the time of the partition, shall be allotted to the child of such pre-deceased child of the pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased daughter, as the case may be.
Explanation. —For the purposes of this sub-section, the interest of a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to him if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before his death, irrespective of whether he was entitled to claim partition or not.
Explanation. —For the purposes of clause (a), the expression “son”, “grandson” or “great-grandson” shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson or great-grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005*.
Section 6 of the Act deals with devolution of interest of a male Hindu in coparcenary property and recognises the rule of devolution by survivorship among the members of the coparcenary. The retention of the Mitakshara coparcenary property without including the females in it means that the females cannot inherit in ancestral property as their male counterparts do. The law by excluding the daughter from participating in the coparcenary ownership not only contributes to her discrimination on the ground of gender but also has led to oppression and negation of her fundamental right of equality guaranteed by the Constitution having regard to the need to render social justice to women, the States of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Maharashtra have made necessary changes in the law giving equal right to daughters in Hindu Mitakshara coparcenary property. The Kerala Legislature has enacted the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975.
It is proposed to remove the discrimination as contained in section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 by giving equal rights to daughters in the Hindu Mitakshara coparcenary property as the sons have.
(d) nothing in clause (b) shall apply to a daughter married prior to or to a partition which had been effected before the commencement of Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990.
Provided that if the deceased had left any child or child of a pre-deceased child, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara co-parcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession as the case may be under this Act and not by survivorship.
Explanations.— (1) For the purposes of this section the interest of female Hindu Mitakshara co-parcenary shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to her if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before her death, irrespective of whether she was entitled to claim partition or not.
(2) Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a person who, before the death of the deceased had separated himself or herself from the co-parcenary, or any of his or her heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.
6C. Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases.— (1) Where, after the commencement of Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 an interest in any immovable property of an intestate or in any business carried by him or her, whether solely or in conjunction with others devolves under sections 6A or 6B upon two or more heirs and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest proposed to be transferred.
(2) The consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased may be transferred under sub-section (1) shall in the absence of any agreement between the parties, be determined by the court, on application, being made to it in this behalf, and if any person proposing to acquire the interest is not willing to acquire it for the consideration so determined, such person shall be liable to pay all costs of or incidental to the application.
(3) If there are two or more heirs proposing to acquire any interest under this section, that heir who offers the highest consideration for the transfer shall be preferred.
Explanation.— In this section ‘court’ means the court within the limits of whose jurisdiction the immovable property is situate or the business is carried on, and includes any other court which the State Government may by notification in the Official Gazette specify in this behalf.
A wife inherited the interest of her deceased husband in the family property, she continued to be a member of the family and the property including that of her’s was held by the family. As a female heir, having inherited property under section 6, she cannot be treated as having ceased to be a member of the family without her volition. Though she can dispose of her undivided interest in the co-parcenery property by a w ill or sale for a valuable consideration, she cannot make a gift of such interest without the prior consent of the other coparceners; Kanna Gounder v. Arjuna Gounder , AIR 2003 Mad 157.
(i) The contention of the petitioners that there was automatic partition amongst the heirs of the deceased Karta on his death has been negatived because it is only when the deceased had left his surviving female heirs as provided in proviso to section 6 of the Act, a notional partition is deemed to have taken place in the joint family property for the purpose of ascertaining the share of the deceased in the joint family properties which comes to the share of the female heirs. If there are male heirs there is no automatic partition; Shivgonda Balgonda Patil v. Director of Resettlement, AIR 1992 Bom 72.
(ii) The heirs will get his or her share in the interest which the deceased had in the coparcenary property at the time of his death in addition to the share which he or she received or must be deemed to have received in the notional partition; Gurupad v. Hirabai, AIR 1978 SC 1239.
(iii) The fiction in the explanation of section 6 of the Act should be carried to a narrow extent only with a new point to implement the purpose for which it was introduced. When there were only two coparceners and one of them died, then if any person other then the coparcener is entitled to a share as a result of severance of the share of the deceased coparcener, the share of such other person will become fixed; Shushilabai v. Naraynarao , AIR 1975 Bom 257.
(iv) The deceased coparcener’s share gets fixed on the date of his death, subsequent fluctuations in the fortunes of the coparceners do not affect it; Karuppa v. Palaniammal; AIR 1963 Mad 254.
The interpretation of provisions of section 6, its proviso and explanation 1 thereto with legislative intent in regard to the enlargement of share of the female heirs, qualitatively and quantitatively; Gurupad v. Hira Bai , AIR 1978 SC 1239.
Explanation 2.—Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a person who has separated himself from the coparcenary before the death of the deceased or any of his heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.”.
* Date of commencement 9-9-2005.
Among the heirs specified in the Schedule, those in class I shall take simultaneously and to the exclusion of all other heirs, those in the first entry in class II shall be preferred to those in the second entry, those in the second entry shall be preferred to those in the third entry, and so on in succession.
Rule1.- The intestate’s widow, or if there are more widow than one, all the widows together, shall take one share.
Rule 2.- The surviving sons and daughter and the mother of the intestate shall each take one share.
(i) among the heirs in the branch of the pre-deceased son shall be son made that his widow (or widows together) and the surviving sons and daughters get equal portions, and the branch of his pre-deceased sons gets the same portion.
Rule 1- Of two heirs, the one who has fewer or no degrees of ascent is preferred.
Rule 2.- Where the number of degrees of ascent is the same or none, that heir is preferred who has fewer or no degrees of descent.
Rule 1 or Rule 2 they take simultaneously.
The number of cognates is larger than the number of agnates as the agnate traces his relationship to the propositus wholly through males, while a cognate is not required to trace his or her relationship with the propositus wholly through males. Held that after the failure of class I and class II heirs, the respondents being agnates should inherit instead of cognates; Prabhu Dayal v. Suwa Lal, AIR 1994 Raj 149.
Explanation.- In this sub-section, “property” includes both movable and immovable property acquired by a female Hindu by inheritance or devise, or at a partition, or in lieu of arrears of maintenance, or by gift from any person, whether a relative or note, before, at or after her marriage, or by her own skill or exertion, or by purchase or by prescription, or in any other manner whatsoever, and also any such property held by her as stridhana immediately before the commencement of this Act.
(i) Property given to widow in lieu of her maintenance, after coming into force of Hindu Succession Act, ripens into full estate and widow becomes absolute owner in view of section 14(1) of the Act; Santosh v. Saraswathibai, AIR 2006 Kant 85.
(ii) The respondent had a limited widow’s estate in the scheduled properties which was given to her in lier of her maintenance and the same ripened into an absolute estate in view of the provisions of section 14 (1) of the Act. Thus, the Act made her an absolute owner; Yemanappa Dudappa Marve v. Yelubai, AIR 2003 Karn 396.
(iii) Any property possessed by a Hindu female, irrespective of how it was acquired, becomes her absolute property after coming into force of the Act in view of the operation of section 14(1); Chaudhary v. Ajudhia, AIR 2003 NOC 126 (HP).
(iv) The testator had given the property to Sarjabai only for a limited period, hence she would not be its absolute owner under sub-section (1) of section 14. The property would, in fact, be governed by sub-section (2) of section 14 as the court should give effect to the intention of the testator; Bhura v. Kashiram, AIR 1994 SC 1202.
(v) Sub-section (2) of section 14 must be read as a proviso or exception to sub-section (1) of section 14 and its operation must be confined to cases where property is acquired for the first time as a grant without any pre-existing right. If the female had an existing interest in the property, the interposition of any instrument will not affect the operation of sub-section (1) of section 14 and the property will be held by the female as her absolute property; M. Shamugha Udayar v. Sivanandam, AIR 1994 Mad 123.
(vi) When some property is allotted to the widow in lieu of her claim for maintenance, she becomes its absolute owner; V. Tulsamma v. Sesha Reddy, AIR 1977 SC 1944.
(vii) The right of the alliance is co-extensive with that of the widow; Jagat Singh v. Teja Singh, AIR 1970 P&H 309 (FB).
(i) The words “any property possessed by a female Hindu” include actual as well as constructive possession. Even when the property is in the possession of a trespasser, she is in its constructive possession; Mangal v. Ratno, AIR 1967 SC 1786.
(ii) The word ‘possessed’ is used in the broad sense and in the context means the state of owning or having in ones hand or power; Gurumalappuru v. Setra, AIR 1959 SC 577.
(i) The expression “female Hindu” in the heading of section 14 of the Act as well as the expression “any property possessed by a female Hindu” have to be given a wider interpretation in consonance with the wishes and desires of the framers of the Constitution. The expression ‘female Hindu’ would take in “daughter” also. Therefore, limited interest of daughter in property would get enlarged to full right after the commencement of the Act; Jose v. Ramakrishnan Nair Radhakrishnan, AIR 2004 Ker 16.
(ii) If no property is given in lieu of maintenance and only a sum of money is given, then section 14 does not apply; Sulabha v. Abhimanyu, AIR 1983 Ori 71.
(i) for such clauses (c) and (d) of section 8, the following had been substituted, namely :- ” (c) thirdly, the there is no heirs of any of the two classes, then upon his relatives, whether agnates or cognates”.
“(a) firstly, upon the sons and daughters (including the children of any pre-deceased son or daughter) and the mother.
(c) secondly, upon the father and the husband.
(e) lastly, upon the heirs of the husband”.
(iii) clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 15 had been omitted.
Heirs related to an intestate by full blood shall be preferred to heirs related by half blood, if the nature of the relationship is the same in every other respect.
(b) as tenants-in common and not as joint tenants.
A child who was in the womb at the time of the death of an intestate and who is subsequently born alive have the same right to inherit to the intestate as if he or she had been born before the death of the intestate, and the inheritance shall be deemed to vest in such as case with effect from the date of the death of the intestate.
Where two persons have died in circumstances rendering it uncertain whether either of them, and if so which, survived the other then, for all purposes affecting succession to property, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the younger survived the elder.
(1) Where, after the commencement of this Act, interest in any immovable property of an intestate, or in any business carried on by him or her, whether solely or in conjunction with others, devolve upon two or more heirs specified in class 1 of the Schedule, and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest proposed to be transferred.
(3) If there are two or more heirs specified in class 1 of the Schedule proposing to acquire any interest under this section, that heir who offers the highest consideration for the transfer shall be preferred.
Explanation.- In this section, ‘court” means the court within the limits of whose jurisdiction the immovable property is situate or the business is carried on, and includes any other court which the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf.
Section 23 of the Act disentitles a female heir to ask for partition in respect of a dwelling house wholly occupied by a joint family until the male heirs choose to divide their respective shares therein. It is also proposed to omit the said section so as to remove the disability on female heirs contained in that section.
Where, before or after the commencement of this Act, a Hindu has ceased or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion, children born to him or her after such conversion and their descendants shall be disqualified from inheriting the property of their Hindu relatives, unless such children or descendants are Hindus at the time when the succession opens.
If any person is disqualified from succeeding to any property on the ground of any disease, defect r deformity, as save as provided in this Act, on any other ground whatsoever.
No person shall be disqualified form succeeding to any property on the ground of any disease, defect or deformity, or save as provided in this Act, on any other ground whatsoever.
If an intestate has left no heir qualified to succeed to his or her property in accordance with the provisions of this Act, such property shall devolve on the government; and the government shall take the property subject to all the obligations and liabilities to which an heir would have been subject.
(iv) Nothing in clause (ii) shall apply to a daughter married prior to or to a partition which had been effected before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986.
Provided that if the deceased had left any child or child of a pre-deceased child, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship.
Explanation I .—For the purposes of this section the interest of a female Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to her if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before her death irrespective of whether she was entitled to claim partition or not.
Explanation II .—Nothing contained in the proviso this section shall be construed as enabling a person who before the death of the deceased, had separated himself or herself from the coparcenary or any of his or her heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.
29C. Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases.— (1) Where, after the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986 an interest in any immovable property of an intestate or in any business carried on by him or her, whether solely or in conjunction with others, devolves under section 29A or section 29B upon two or more heirs, and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest proposed to be transferred.
(2) The consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased may be transferred under this section shall, in the absence of any agreement between the parties, be determined by the court on application being made toit in this behalf, and if any person proposing to acquire the interest is not willing to acquire it for the consideration so determined, such person shall be liable to pay all costs of or incidental to the application.
Provided that, if the deceased had left any child or child of a pre-deceased child, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship.
Explanation I.—For the purposes of this section, the interest of a female Hindu in Mitakshara coparcener property shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to her if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before her death, irrespective of whether she was entitled to claim partition or not.
Explanation II.—Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a person who, before the death of the deceased, had separated himself or herself from the coparcenary or any of his or her heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.
29C. Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases.— (1) Where, after the date of the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Maharashtra Amendment) Act, 1994 an interest in any immovable property of any intestate or in any business carried on by him or her, whether solely or in conjunction with others, devolves under section 29A or section 29B upon two or more heirs, and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest proposed to be transferred.
(2) The consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased may be transferred under this section shall, in the absence of any agreement between the parties, be determined by the court on application being made to it in this behalf, and if any person proposing to acquire the interest is not willing to acquire it for the consideration so determined, such person shall be liable to pay all costs of or incidental to the application.
(3) If there are two or more heirs proposing to acquire any interest under this section, then, the heir who offers the highest consideration for the transfer shall be preferred.
(v) nothing in clause (ii) shall apply to a partition which had been effected before the date of the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989.
Provided that if the deceased had left any child or child of a pre-deceased child, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship.
Explanation I.— For the purposes of this section, the interest of a female Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to her if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before her death, irrespective of whether she was entitled to claim partition or not.
Explanation II.— Noting contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a person who, before the death of the deceased had separated himself or herself from the coparcenary or any of his or her heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.
29C. Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases.— (1) Where, after the date of the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989, an interest in any immovable property of an intestate or in any business carried on by him or her, whether solely or in conjunction with others, devolves under section 29A or section 29B upon two or more heirs, and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest proposed to be transferred.
(2) The consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased may be transferred under this section shall, in the absence of any agreement between the parties, be determined by the court on application being made to it in this behalf, and if any person proposing to acquire the interest is not willing to acquire it for the consideration so determined, such person shall be liable to pay all costs of, or incidental to, the application.
Explanation.— In this section “court” means the court within the limits of whose jurisdiction the immovable property is situate or the business is carried on and includes any other court which the s tate Government may, by notification in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, specify in this behalf.
1[***] Any Hindu may dispose of by will or other testamentary disposition any property, which is capable of being so 2[disposed of by him or by her], in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (39 of 1925), or any other law for the time being in force and applicable to Hindus.
1. The brackets and figure “(1)” omitted by Act 58 of 1960, sec. 3 and Sch. II (w.e.f. 26-12-1960).
2. Subs. by Act 39 of 2005, sec. 6, for “disposed of by him” (w.e.f. 9-9-2005).
3. Subs. by Act 56 of 1974, sec. 3 and Sch. II, for “sub-section”.
4. Sub-section (2) omitted by Act 78 of 1956, sec. 29 (w.e.f. 21-12-1956).
III. (1) Daughter’s son’s son, (2) daughter’s son’s daughter , (3) daughter’s daughter’s son, (4) daughter’s daughter’s daughter.
1. Added by Act 39 of 2005, sec. 7 (w.e.f. 9-9-2005).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.