• Judgement of Supreme Court in Civil case no. 7217/2013?

Hi, This is S Priya from Mysore. We are fighting an ancestral property case in Mysore. On 16th October, i came to know that with reference to Civil Case no. 7217/2013. Honorable Supreme court has given a judgment stating that in order to get equal share from ancestral property the daughter and father should be alive on 9th September 2005( date of amendment act ). My mother is aged, im fighting on behalf of her. In India girls ratio is already getting decreased. How can this judgement be helpful for the women whose property rights are not decided yet. Are there any women associations who can help in fighting this case, as the purpose of the legislation gets defeated because it says that the act is prospective. Is this true or not. Please help me.
Asked 1 year ago in Property Law from Mysore, Karnatka
Religion: Hindu
1) you must have engaged lawyer to fight your case in Mysore 

2) judgement depends upon facts of each case 

3) you have not stated detailed facts of your case . On what basis you say property is ancestral 

4) you can do google search of women associations in your city . You can contact them for help in fighting your case 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23291 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
The amendment is a welcome move of course it is prospective and not retrospective. 
You have not given the details of your case but are seeking opinion. Without knowing what your case is and what  relief you are entitled to, it will not be possible to render any opinion to your blunt question. In general if you want to update your academic knowledge, go through the cited judgement personally and properly and find out yourself how far the said judgement suits your case or quenches your thirst for such knowledge or revert with the actual problem for which you will get proper opinions and suggestions to proceed in a right direction.
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14069 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Hi, The facts and circumstances of each case is different............ so  i don't think such a judgement has been passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Pradeep Bharathipura
Advocate, Bangalore
4105 Answers
133 Consultations
4.3 on 5.0
1. What you have read is the basic law. It is known to judges and lawyers. 

2. Judgments do not help in the court. They are good only for an academic discussion. You have to build your case on merits in view of the evidence which comes in the court. 

3. Women associations have no right to intervene as a party in a private dispute of this nature. 
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18158 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Hi priya,
Visit the following for getting the exact details of your case 
http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/chejudis.asp

i can't trace out your judgement or case status. 
with out sharing the details of case how can provide a good and prompt answer. All the cases are different, on what extent supreme court deliver such a decree mentioned as per your query .
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1) hindu married daughters have equal share in ancestral property if ancestral property is not sold or dispossessed through court decree or will before 20-12-2014

2) even if family partition has taken place without registered deed she can claim her share 

3) hindu succession act 1956 nor amendment act 2005 mention any restrictions on date of birth 

4) if on basis of N Kumar judgement females heirs are not given equal share you ought to file appeal right upto the SC 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23291 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1) And one more thing i wanted to know whether the civil case 7217/2013 would be reffered to constitution bench in view of the differences of the division bench judgement which had come earlier ?
This shall be decided by the affected party only.


What is the impact on my case ? 
You have to refer to the relevance of the judgment to your case, if there is any relevance, you may quote this as citation of settled law in your favor in an appeal.  However since you people have already accepted the decree and judgement passed in the pre-decree stage, an the case has come for trial to final decree stage, why have not preferred appeal against the pre-decree which you consider is not favoring you?, when was the pre-decree judgment passed?, At this stage you may have to prefer appeal with condone delay petition too. 
If the final decree is not favoring you, you can prefer an appeal against the final decree judgment too. 
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14069 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
For the perusal of the Civil Case no. 7217/2013, I can't to trace out the exact judgment .So with out go through the gist of the case and judgment how can we say it is applicable in your case .The daughter of a coparcener becomes a coparcener BY BIRTH in her own rights and liabilities in the same manner as the son. She will have rights over the ancestral property in the same manner as the son,(subject to the following conditions) 
if the property had not been partitioned through a registered partition deed or dispossessed due to alienation or by a decree of court or dispossessed through a testament before 20-12-2004.
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Property Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14069 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23291 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18158 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12123 Answers
231 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5226 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
868 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
436 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2752 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1950 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0