Legal right of daughter in ancestral property.

Wrong.

Daughters have an equal right to share in ancestral property just as sons since the 2006 amendment in Hindu Succession Act, irrespective of whether or not they are married. (However, if the property had been partitioned or alienated prior to 2006 then the right is lost as the section lacks retrospective effect.)

In this regard, the only difference between the majority of India and some states (Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka etc) is that the latter introduced this amendment way prior to the Hindu Succession Act being amended (which applies to the whole of India except J&K), however, with the exception that it didn't apply to daughters married prior to the passing of the amendments in each state. For instance, in Andhra Pradesh, which was the first state to declare daughters as coparceners in 1985, daughters married before 1985 were excluded from coparcenary share, that is, not given this right same as unmarried daughters.)

However, any such restraint on Hindu married daughters is mere history now, since this exception was removed when the law became nation-wide in 2006.

Supreme Court declared that daughters have equal share in father's ancestral property irrespective of the year in which daughters were born.

But to get the share in ancestral property, daughter and father BOTH must be alive on or after Sept08,2005.

If father died before Sept 08,2005, daughter CAN NOT claim any share in father's ancestral property. The 2005 amendment 

applies only after Sept2005.  This is authentic information.

As per the Ammendement Act in 2005, the women are entitled to equal share in ancestral properties with restrospective effect.  The deadline before or after Sept 8, 2005 is immaterial.