Hindu Succession Act 1956 Section 6: Devolution of Coparcenary Property (2026)

Published on: October 13, 2026
Last updated: 13 July 2026

What Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 does: since the 2005 amendment, a daughter is a coparcener in her own right by birth, with the same rights and liabilities in ancestral (coparcenary) property as a son, including the right to seek partition. Last verified October 2026.

Explainer · Succession Law · Hindu Succession Act

Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 decides how a person's share in ancestral, or coparcenary, property passes on. Since the 2005 amendment, a daughter is a coparcener in her own right by birth, in the same way as a son, with the same rights and the same liabilities. This means a daughter can ask for a partition and claim her share of ancestral property, just like a son. The Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) settled that this right comes by birth, so the father does not need to have been alive on the day the amendment started. This explainer sets out what Section 6 says, what the 2005 amendment changed, and what the leading case decided. Last verified October 2026.

The short answer
  • What it is: Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act governs how a coparcener's interest in ancestral (coparcenary) property passes on.
  • Daughters are coparceners: since the 2005 amendment, a daughter is a coparcener by birth with the same rights and liabilities as a son, including the right to seek partition.
  • Right by birth: the Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma (2020) held the right comes by birth, so the father need not have been alive on 9 September 2005.
  • Saved partitions: a partition by registered deed or court decree before 20 December 2004 is protected and is not reopened.

01What coparcenary property means

In a Hindu joint family governed by the Mitakshara school, there is a special kind of property called coparcenary property. A coparcener is a family member who gets a share in this property by birth. The group of coparceners together own the ancestral property, and each coparcener's share goes up or down as members are born or die.

Section 6 deals with what happens to a coparcener's interest in this property. The old idea was that the interest passed by survivorship, meaning it went to the surviving coparceners, and daughters were left out of the coparcenary. The 2005 amendment changed this.

Coparcenary is not the same as self acquired property

Section 6 is about ancestral coparcenary property. Property a person buys or earns on their own is self acquired, and they can leave it to anyone by will. Section 6 does not control self acquired property.

02What Section 6 says now

After the 2005 amendment, the substituted Section 6 provides, in plain words:

  • the daughter of a coparcener becomes, by birth, a coparcener in her own right, in the same manner as a son;
  • the daughter has the same rights in the coparcenary property as a son would have, and the same liabilities;
  • when a coparcener dies, the interest devolves by testamentary or intestate succession under the Act, and not by survivorship;
  • a daughter can seek partition of the coparcenary property and ask for her share.

So a daughter is now treated as a full member of the coparcenary, with the right to demand a partition and to hold, deal with and pass on her share.

03What the 2005 amendment changed

Before 9 September 2005, daughters were not coparceners under the general law. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 replaced the old Section 6 with effect from that date and put sons and daughters on an equal footing in coparcenary property.

PointBefore the 2005 amendmentAfter the 2005 amendment
Daughter as coparcenerNo, daughters were not coparcenersYes, a daughter is a coparcener by birth, like a son
Right to seek partitionDaughters could not demand partition as coparcenersA daughter can seek partition and claim her share
How interest devolvesOften by survivorship to surviving coparcenersBy testamentary or intestate succession, not survivorship

The change was meant to remove an old gender difference and give daughters the same place in the ancestral property as sons.

04Vineeta Sharma: the leading case

For some years courts disagreed on one question: did the father have to be alive on 9 September 2005 for the daughter to claim? Two Supreme Court benches gave conflicting answers, in Prakash v. Phulavati and Danamma v. Amar.

A three judge bench settled it in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020). The key holdings, in simple terms, are:

  • the daughter's right is by birth, so the father need not have been alive on 9 September 2005;
  • the right applies to daughters living on that date, whether born before or after it;
  • the court overruled the view in Phulavati that required the father to be alive.

This is now the controlling authority on amended Section 6.

05Limits and saved partitions

The right is wide but not unlimited. The main carve outs are:

  • a partition that was already completed by a registered partition deed, or by a court decree, before 20 December 2004 is protected and is not reopened;
  • the court in Vineeta Sharma treated only genuine, actual partitions as a bar, so a merely notional or statutory partition on paper does not defeat a daughter's claim.

A practical point on proof

Because old, informal family arrangements are often claimed to be "past partitions", courts look closely for a registered deed or a decree. An oral or unregistered claim of partition before 2004 will usually not be enough to defeat a daughter's coparcenary right.

Some questions, such as the position of buyers who bought ancestral property before 2005, are still worked out case by case.

Section 6 often comes up alongside other succession and property steps. The common ones are:

A draft partition plaint can help you see what such a case looks like; see a partition suit plaint format.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

Coparcenary disputes turn heavily on case law, from Vineeta Sharma down to how a particular High Court treats a claimed past partition. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments on Section 6 and daughters' coparcenary rights, by party or advocate, with results in under 5 seconds, so you can line up the authorities that fit your facts. Reported authority runs from Supreme Court rulings of 1950 and High Court rulings of 1990 to the latest orders. A partition matter also runs for years, so Claw lets you track the case, its orders and hearings across 9,102 courts, benches and forums by party name.

Claw does not use the documents you upload to train its AI models. Create a free Claw account to find coparcenary and partition judgments close to your facts and to follow a pending suit, and use case search across Indian courts to search the wider body of succession law.

08Sources and further reading

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. Succession law turns on the facts and on current case law, so check the statute and take advice from counsel before you act.

09Frequently asked questions

What is Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act?

Section 6 governs how a coparcener's interest in ancestral (Mitakshara coparcenary) property devolves. Since the 2005 amendment it makes a daughter a coparcener by birth, with the same rights and liabilities as a son, and provides that the interest passes by succession and not by survivorship.

Do daughters have equal rights in ancestral property?

Yes. After the 2005 amendment to Section 6, a daughter is a coparcener in her own right by birth, in the same way as a son, with the same rights and liabilities and the right to ask for a partition.

Does the father need to be alive for a daughter to claim?

No. The Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) held that the daughter's right is by birth, so the father does not need to have been alive on 9 September 2005. This overruled the earlier view that required the father to be alive.

Which partitions are protected from reopening?

A partition completed by a registered partition deed or by a court decree before 20 December 2004 is saved and is not reopened. The court treats only genuine, actual partitions as a bar, not merely notional or oral ones.

What is the difference between coparcenary and self acquired property?

Coparcenary property is ancestral property in which coparceners get a share by birth, and Section 6 governs it. Self acquired property is what a person earns or buys on their own, which they can deal with and leave by will as they choose.

Can I find coparcenary judgments in Claw?

Yes. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments on Section 6 and daughters' coparcenary rights, by party or advocate, with results in under 5 seconds, and track a pending partition matter and its orders across 9,102 courts, benches and forums. It researches and tracks the case but does not give legal advice.

Explore CLAW

The tools behind the guides

CLAW helps Indian advocates and firms manage cases, track courts and research the law.