Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Shakuntala, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the orders of the Land Tribunal at Bidar (Annexures B and B1) and to direct the tribunal to reopen the declaration proceedings to consider the shares of major daughters under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 (Act 39 of 2005). The petitioner's father, Sri Kashinath Rao, had filed a declaration under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, and the Land Tribunal had granted occupancy rights in his favor. The petitioner, being a daughter, claimed that she was entitled to a share in the property by virtue of the amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, which came into force on September 9, 2005. The court, after hearing the counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, allowed the petition. It set aside the impugned orders and directed the Land Tribunal to reopen the proceedings and consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, and the decision of this court reported in 2009 ILR (Kar) page 3699. The court further directed the tribunal to pass appropriate orders within six months from the date of receipt of the order.
Headnote
A) Hindu Succession Law - Daughters' Rights - Amendment Act 39 of 2005 - Section 6 - The petitioner, a daughter, sought reopening of land tribunal proceedings to claim share in her father's property as per the amended Hindu Succession Act, 2005. The court held that the amendment granting daughters equal rights in coparcenary property is retrospective and must be considered by the tribunal. (Paras 1-3)
B) Land Law - Land Tribunal - Reopening of Proceedings - The Land Tribunal had earlier granted occupancy rights to the petitioner's father. The court directed the tribunal to reopen the declaration and consider the provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, regarding granting shares to major daughters. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Land Tribunal should reopen the declaration proceedings to consider the shares of major daughters in light of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders (Annexures B and B1) are quashed. The Land Tribunal is directed to reopen the proceedings and consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, and the decision of this court reported in 2009 ILR (Kar) page 3699. The tribunal shall pass appropriate orders within six months from the date of receipt of the order.
Law Points
- Hindu Succession Act
- 1956
- Section 6
- Amendment Act 39 of 2005
- Daughters' right to coparcenary property
- Land Tribunal proceedings
- Writ of Certiorari
- Writ of Mandamus
Case Details
2017 LawText (KAR) (01) 34
Writ Petition No.81480/2011 (LR-RES)
Shivakumar Kalloor (for petitioner), A. Syed Habeeb (for respondents)
State of Karnataka, Land Tribunal Aurad (B), Tahasildar and Secretary Land Tribunal Aurad (B)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging orders of Land Tribunal and seeking reopening of declaration proceedings to consider daughters' shares under amended Hindu Succession Act.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of Land Tribunal orders (Annexures B and B1) and direction to reopen declaration and consider provisions of Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 for granting shares to major daughters.
Filing Reason
The Land Tribunal had granted occupancy rights to the petitioner's father without considering the rights of daughters under the amended Hindu Succession Act, 2005.
Previous Decisions
Land Tribunal passed orders on 29.08.1979 and 14.10.1980 granting occupancy rights to the petitioner's father.
Issues
Whether the Land Tribunal should reopen the declaration proceedings to consider the shares of major daughters under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that as a daughter, she is entitled to a share in her father's property by virtue of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, and the Land Tribunal should reconsider the declaration.
Respondents did not oppose the petition.
Ratio Decidendi
The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, which grants daughters equal rights in coparcenary property, is retrospective in nature and must be considered by the Land Tribunal when determining shares in property. The tribunal is bound to reopen proceedings to give effect to the amended law.
Judgment Excerpts
Sri Kashinath Rao, S/o Sri Baswanth Rao Deshmukh, had filed a declaration under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act and the Land Tribunal had granted occupancy rights in his favour.
The petitioner being the daughter of Sri Kashinath Rao, claims that she is entitled to a share in the property by virtue of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are quashed. The Land Tribunal is directed to reopen the proceedings and consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Procedural History
The petitioner's father filed a declaration under the Karnataka Land Reforms Act. The Land Tribunal passed orders on 29.08.1979 and 14.10.1980 granting occupancy rights. The petitioner filed this writ petition in 2011 seeking to quash those orders and for reopening of proceedings to consider her share under the amended Hindu Succession Act.
Acts & Sections
- Hindu Succession Act, 1956: Section 6
- Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005: Act 39 of 2005
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
