Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



The apex court has now categorically ruled that the daughters’ right flows from their birth and not by any other factor such as the existence of their fathers. In other words, it has rejected the common misinterpretation that only daughters of coparceners who were alive on that day could get an equal share in property.
If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"

Unknown title
rdict settles the question whether the coparcenary right of daughters comes into effect only if the father through whom they claim that right was alive on the day the amendment came into force. <span>The apex court has now categorically ruled that the daughters’ right flows from their birth and not by any other factor such as the existence of their fathers. In other words, it has rejected the common misinterpretation that only daughters of coparceners who were alive on that day could get an equal share in property. The court has rightly recognised that the amendment conferred equal status as a coparcener on daughters in Hindu families governed by Mitakshara law, and this right accrued by birth. Th


Summary

statusnot read reprioritisations
last reprioritisation on suggested re-reading day
started reading on finished reading on

Details



Discussion

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.