Uttam v. Saubhag Singh (2016) 4 SCC 68
Author: Gulzar Hashmi | Location: India | Published: 31 Oct 2025
Primary: Section 6 HSA; Mitakshara Coparcenary; Notional Partition; Survivorship vs Succession | Secondary: Section 30 HSA; Class I Heirs; Partition Suit; Ancestral Property
Quick Summary
This case explains what happens to a Mitakshara coparcener’s share when he dies leaving a widow and children. The law treats it as if a partition happened at his death. His share then goes by succession to his Class I heirs, not by survivorship to the coparcenary.
Because of this, the grandson (born after the grandfather’s death) cannot claim a birthright in that share. The Supreme Court said the property that devolved on the heirs became their separate property, so a later-born grandson cannot demand partition of it.
Issues
Rules
- Section 6 HSA (pre-2005) with proviso: On a coparcener’s death leaving specified Class I heirs (e.g., widow, sons, daughters), a notional partition is assumed; his share devolves by succession, not survivorship.
- Section 30 HSA: A male Hindu may dispose only his own interest by will; after devolution, each heir holds a separate share.
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Appellant
- Claims a coparcenary birthright in ancestral property.
- Seeks partition to carve out his 1/8th share.
Respondents
- On the grandfather’s death, a notional partition occurred under Section 6 (proviso).
- The share devolved by succession to Class I heirs; it stopped being joint family property.
Judgment
- Section 6 (proviso) applies: Grandfather left a widow and four children. A notional partition at death is assumed.
- Devolution by succession: His share went to Class I heirs as individual shares. It ceased to be coparcenary property.
- No coparcenary right for appellant: Born after the death, Uttam could not claim a birthright in that separated share.
- Result: Appeal dismissed. Appellant was not entitled to sue for partition of the grandfather’s separated share.
Ratio
When a coparcener dies leaving Class I heirs, his share is carved out notionally and devolves by succession. That share is no longer joint family property; a grandson born later cannot claim a coparcenary interest in it.
Why It Matters
- Title clarity: Tells us when ancestral property stops being joint on a death.
- Litigation filter: Blocks partition suits by those with no coparcenary right.
- Estate planning: Aligns with Section 30 on testamentary power over one’s own share.
Key Takeaways
Deemed at death if Class I heirs survive.
Later-born grandson has no claim in separated share.
Share goes as individual shares to Class I heirs.
One can will only one’s own interest.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Die → Divide → Devolve.”
- Die: Coparcener passes away leaving Class I heirs.
- Divide: Notional partition fixes his share.
- Devolve: Share goes by succession as separate property.
IRAC
Issue: Does a grandson born after the coparcener’s death have a coparcenary right in the deceased’s share?
Rule: Section 6 (proviso) → notional partition; devolution by succession to Class I heirs; Section 30 → power over one’s own interest.
Application: Grandfather left widow and children; hence his share separated and devolved by succession; property lost joint family character.
Conclusion: No coparcenary right for the later-born grandson; partition suit fails.
Glossary
- Mitakshara Coparcenary
- A narrow body of male/female coparceners (post-2005) with birthright in ancestral property.
- Notional Partition
- A legal fiction that fixes the deceased coparcener’s share at the time of death.
- Class I Heirs
- Heirs listed in Schedule I of the HSA (e.g., widow, son, daughter).
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now