प्रकाश बनाम फूलवती
| Citation | (2016) 2 SCC 36 |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Date | 16 October 2015 |
| Year | 2016 |
| Bench | Anil R. Dave, A.K. Goel JJ. |
| Acts/Articles | Hindu Succession Act 1956 Section 6 (as amended 2005) |
| Category | Property & Land Law |
Key Principle Established
The 2005 Amendment to Hindu Succession Act (giving daughters equal coparcenary rights) is prospective and applies only if the father (coparcener) was alive on 9 September 2005.
A daughter claimed equal share in ancestral property under the 2005 Amendment to the Hindu Succession Act. The question was whether the amendment applied when the father had died before 9 September 2005.
The Court held that the 2005 Amendment is prospective and creates rights from the date of the amendment. The coparcener (father) must have been alive on 9 September 2005 for the daughter to claim equal coparcenary rights under the amended Section 6.
Note: This was later overruled by the larger bench in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) which held that the amendment is retroactive and daughters have coparcenary rights by birth regardless of when the father died.
(2020) 9 SCC 1
Daughters have equal coparcenary rights by birth under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 — irrespective of whether the father…
Read Analysis(1999) 2 SCC 4
Mutation in revenue records does not confer title. It is merely a fiscal record for revenue collection purposes. Title can…
Read Analysis2010 SCC OnLine P&H 8312
Shamlat deh (village common land) cannot be sold, transferred, or encroached upon. Panchayat has duty to protect common land for…
Read AnalysisThis judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).
22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.