Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 Empowering Women

in (2006) 8 SCC 581 = (2007) 1 MLJ 797 (SC)[SHEELA DEVI AND OTHERS v. LAL CHAND AND ANOTHER), the court decided that partition opens up on the date of the hindu women's father. Thus a 'birthright' as per the act depends upon the death date of the hindu woman's father !! If the woman is from Andhra pradesh, her father should have died after 1985, if she is from Maharastra ,her father should have died afte 1994 and so on for AP and TN . If she is from rest of India, her father should have died after 9.9.2005. It appears to be a convoluted logic that is being applied by various courts in India. For all the women who lost their father before 9.9.2005, this amendmend has no meaning at all

The proposed amendment is made with half baked knowledge of working of Hindu Law as enforced in India. It purports install gender equity, Wife is also a female member of Hindu family whose rights has to be respected. In Mitachara Law the mother or wife or daughter of deceased male Hindu is not considered for devolution of coparcenary interest thus they introduced notional partition under section 6 of Main Act. But under Dravidian school of Law the mother is not considered as alloted any share under customary law but in other schools of law allot under Explanation NO.1 to Section 6 of the Act. But this Anomaly is not addressed till date. Further this author of the amendment overlooked fundamental social scenario that agricultural lands are held in tiny bits hence cost of execution of formal partition deeds in rural areas is substituted by mutation in the revenue records absolutely in pursuance of oral agreement of partition. But this amendment derecongises any such oral partition thus puts many families livelihood sustaining resources in quandary