Smt Ramakka vs Smt. Thanamma Since Deceased By Legal ... on 6 June, 2013
“When the coparcenary property passes to a sole surviving coparcener,
provision has been made in clause (d) of Section 8(1). This clause, in
protecting the rights of females, had necessarily to give females the right
to share in the coparcenary property even if there be no partition at all,
because, on passing of property to a sole surviving coparcener, there could
not possibly be any partition sought by the male members of the coparcenary
body. The right conferred by clause (d) is, therefore, an independent
right and not connected with the rights granted to the females under
clauses (a), (b) and (c). The females who are to get benefit are all those
to whom a right to a share in the joint family property would have accrued
if there had been a partition either under clause (a), or clause (b) or
clause (c). The language of clause (d) has to be interpreted as laying
down that right to shares will vest in all females of the joint Hindu
family who would have possibly received the right to a share if at any
earlier time there had been partition in the family in any of the three
manners laid down in clauses (a), (b) and (c).