Which one of the following options is / are true?

The correct answer is 'All of these'.

Key Points

• The Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
  • This act initially aimed to codify the laws related to intestate or unwilled succession among Hindus. It granted women certain rights to inherit property, but these rights were limited compared to those of male heirs.
  • However, the act did not explicitly provide daughters the right to ask for sustenance from a joint Hindu family.
• The Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005:
  • This amendment was a landmark change that provided equal inheritance rights to daughters in Hindu families. It ensured that daughters, like sons, became coparceners in the family property.
  • This amendment allowed daughters to have the same rights and liabilities as sons in a joint Hindu family.
• Supreme Court Ruling in 2015:
  • The Supreme Court ruled that the benefits of the 2005 amendment would not apply retrospectively. This meant that if the father (the coparcener) had passed away before September 9, 2005, the daughter would not be entitled to the benefits of the amendment.
  • This decision clarified the scope and applicability of the 2005 amendment, ensuring that it was not applied to cases prior to its enactment.

Additional Information

• Historical Context:
  • Prior to these legal reforms, the property rights of Hindu women were severely restricted. Traditionally, daughters were not entitled to inherit ancestral property in the same manner as sons.
  • The changes brought about by the Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005, were part of broader efforts to ensure gender equality in inheritance laws.
• Legal Implications:
  • The amendment and subsequent Supreme Court rulings have significant implications for property disputes and family settlements. They have paved the way for more equitable distribution of family assets.
  • Understanding these legal changes is crucial for individuals dealing with inheritance issues within Hindu families.