• Today: October 31, 2025

danamma-suman-surpur-v-amar

31 October, 2025
201
Daughters’ Coparcenary Rights — Danamma @ Suman Surpur v. Amar (SC, 2018) | The Law Easy

DANAMMA @ SUMAN SURPUR & ANR. v. AMAR & ORS.

Daughters as coparceners by birth — equal rights and equal shares in a Hindu joint family after the 2005 amendment.

Supreme Court of India 2018 SC 2018 HSA §6 (Coparcenary) India ~6 min
Illustration for daughters’ coparcenary rights under Section 6 HSA
```
PRIMARY_KEYWORDS: coparcenary rights, Section 6 HSA, daughters’ equal share SECONDARY_KEYWORDS: HSA 2005 amendment, Hindu joint family, partition decree
AUTHOR_NAME: Gulzar Hashmi LOCATION: India PUBLISH_DATE: 2025-10-31 Slug: danamma-suman-surpur-v-amar
```

Quick Summary

Core holding: A daughter of a coparcener is a coparcener by birth. She has the same rights and duties as a son under Section 6, HSA (as amended in 2005).

Even if the father died earlier, if no final partition had taken place, courts must give the daughter an equal share. Here, each daughter got 1/5th along with the widow and two sons.

```

Issues

Are daughters coparceners by birth at par with sons?
Do daughters get equal shares in partitions decided after the 2005 amendment?

Rules

  • Section 6, HSA (as amended 2005): Daughter of a coparcener becomes a coparcener by birth, with rights and liabilities equal to a son.
  • Amendment applies to partitions finalized after 2005; pending suits must reflect the new rights.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline of litigation and statutory change under HSA Section 6
2001: Family patriarch Gurulingappa Savadi dies; joint family property dispute arises.
2002: Grandson (Amar) files partition suit; claims daughters are not coparceners; trial court agrees.
2005: HSA amended; daughters declared coparceners by birth.
2007: Trial court passes partition decree without giving daughters equal rights.
Appeals fail in lower courts; daughters move Supreme Court under Article 136.

Arguments

Appellants (Daughters)

  • After 2005, they are coparceners by birth—equal rights.
  • Partition suit was pending; decree came in 2007, so amended Section 6 applies.
  • Marriage or date of birth cannot defeat statutory equality.

Respondents

  • Daughters were married; custom treated them as not entitled.
  • Father died before 2005; rights should be frozen earlier.
  • Earlier rulings had denied daughters’ shares; those should stand.

Judgment

Judgment illustration for Supreme Court ruling on daughters' equal share
  • Appeal allowed. High Court and trial court decisions set aside.
  • Daughters recognized as coparceners by birth with equal shares.
  • Since final partition decree was in 2007, the 2005 amendment governed the outcome.
  • Each daughter entitled to 1/5th share along with the widow and two sons.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 6 HSA (2005) grants daughters coparcenary by birth. Courts must apply it to partitions finalized after 2005, regardless of when the father died, unless partition was legally concluded earlier.

Why It Matters

  • Strengthens gender equality within Hindu joint families.
  • Gives clear guidance for pending and future partition suits post-2005.
  • Aligns family property law with constitutional equality principles.

Key Takeaways

  • Daughters = coparceners by birth (HSA §6, 2005).
  • Apply to partitions finalized after 2005.
  • Equal shares with sons and widow when computing allotments.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “Born Equal @ 2005.”

  1. Born: Daughter’s status starts at birth.
  2. Equal: Same rights and duties as son.
  3. 2005: Apply to partitions finalized after amendment.

IRAC Outline

Issue Rule Application Conclusion
Are daughters coparceners with equal shares? HSA §6 (Amendment 2005): daughter = coparcener by birth. Partition suit pending; decree in 2007 → amended law governs; marriage/date of birth irrelevant. Yes. Appeals allowed; daughters get 1/5th each with other heirs.

Glossary

Coparcenary
A narrower body within a Hindu joint family where members get rights by birth in ancestral property.
Partition
Legal division of joint family property into separate shares.
Final Decree
Court order conclusively determining and allotting shares; before this, rights can still be affected by law changes.

Student FAQs

Yes, if the partition was not legally concluded before 2005. The amended Section 6 applies to later finalizations.

No. Marriage status does not limit coparcenary rights after the amendment.

Courts examine whether the partition had reached finality. If not finalized, amended rights may still be applied.

With widow, two sons, and two daughters, the Court allotted 1/5th share to each.
Reviewed by The Law Easy
```

Comment

Nothing for now