Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

20. The interest of their father (1st defendant) in the coparcenary shall be determined based on explanation to Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The 1st defendant admittedly died prior to coming into force of Act 39 of 2005 and Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act as its stood on the date of death of 1st defendant reads as follows:-

“6.Devolution of interest in coparcenary property.- When a male Hindu dies after the commencement of this Act having at the time of his death an interest in a Mitakshara coparcenary property, his interest in the property shall devolve by survivorship upon the surviving members of the coparcenary and not in accordance with this Act:
Provided that, if the deceased had left him surviving a female relative specified in class I of the Schedule or a male relative specified in that class who claims through such female relative, the interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara coparcenary property shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 03:52:31 pm ) survivorship.
Explanation 2. – Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a person who has separated himself from the coparcenary before the death of the deceased or any of his heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest referred to therein.”

21. In the case on hand, the 1st defendant died on 09.09.2004 prior to coming into force of Act 39 of 2005 leaving behind Class-I Female Heirs namely defendants 2 to 6, his wife and daughters. Therefore, his interest in the coparcenary would not devolve by survivorship, but it will devolve by testamentary or intestate succession. It is nobody’s case that 1st defendant left a Will, therefore, the property of 1 st defendant will devolve as per provisions of Section 8 among his heirs. By virtue of Section 16(3) of Hindu Marriage Act, the plaintiffs 2 and 4 in their capacity as children born to 1 st defendant under void marriage are also entitled to equal share along with other children of 1st defendant and his surviving wife. On the date of death of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 03:52:31 pm ) st th 1 defendant, he is entitled to 1/7 share in the suit properties along with her daughters defendants 3 to 6 and legal heirs of pre-deceased sons namely defendants 7 to 14. Though 1st defendant died prior to coming into force of Act 39 of 2005, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma reported in 2020 (9) SCC 1, Act 39 of 2005 is retroactive in nature and hence, the daughters are entitled to the benefit of the same. Hence, I hold the 1st defendant's interest in coparcenary shall be fixed as 1/7th share. On the date of his death, he was survived by his first wife/2nd defendant, four daughters, namely defendants 3 to 6, legal representatives of pre-deceased first son Velayutham namely defendants 7 to 10 and legal representatives of predeceased son Chandran namely defendants 11 to 14, apart from plaintiffs 2 and 4. Therefore, plaintiffs 2 and 4 are entitled to 1/9th share each in the 1/7th share of the 1st defendant. In all plaintiffs 2 and 4 are entitled to 1/63 share each in the suit property. Likewise, the 2nd defendant is also entitled to 1/63 share in the suit property. The daughters of 1st defendant, defendants 3 to 6 are entitled to 10/63 share each. The defendants 7 to 10 in their capacity as legal representatives of predeceased son-Velayutham collectively entitled to 10/63 share each. Likewise, the defendants 11 to 14 in their capacity as legal representatives of predeceased son-Chandran collectively entitled to 10/63 share each. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/01/2026 03:52:31 pm )