Can a Married Daughter Claim Equal Rights in Fathers Property as she was Married before 2005 and she didn't file a Case in Lower Court i.e in District Court and appealed in High Court and the High Court Judge Dismissed the Case in CRP and AS Suit citing that in Lower Court it wasn't appealed and there can be no Claim since no Appeal was made in Lower District Court and so High Court cant accept the Claim and the Case were Dismissed and in this Circumstances what can we be done and how should I claim or what other Steps since the case was dismissed by the High Court in CRP and in AS, What other Steps can be taken to Claim Equal Rights in Fathers Property.
Daughters also have as caparcenary rights on their birth. According to a recent supreme court ruling, when the Hindu succession act, 1956 was amended to give equal rights to the daughters in their father's property. If WILL is not written by father the property will be divided equally among all legal heirs.
Daughters are entitles to equal share in property as much as other legal heirs. Married or unmarried both are entitle for share in property. You can file partition suit in civil court against other legal heirs.
In August 2020, In the landmark case of Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma, a bench of the Supreme Court decided that even daughters have equal coparcenary rights in a Hindu undivided family as any son would have in a Family property.
In this case, the Supreme Court elucidated two points:
• Rights to Coparcenary are acquired by the daughters on their birth.
• Father’s being alive is not material, in this respect when 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act was passed.
The amendment to Hindu Succession Act was passed in 2005 to bestow equal status on both sons and daughters of coparceners. Before the Hindu Succession Act amendment of 2005, coparcenary rights were given only to the sons of coparceners.
The Court has explained that the equal rights granted to the daughters of coparceners by the 2005 amendment apply from their birth, irrespective of when their father dies, and marriage does not affect these rights. The Apex Court has also clarified in this case that the 2005 amendment applies retrospectively.
This judgment is subject to the condition that the coparcenary property in question should not have been separated by the father before the date of 20 December 2004. So long as the property stayed coparcenary property and was not divided up to this date, a daughter can now claim her interest in the property.