Son cannot claim coparcenary birthright share in property his father inherited by succession, rules Supreme Court

Dismissing a civil appeal, the Supreme Court held that a minor son could not claim a half share, as a coparcener by birth, in land that his father had earlier obtained through a partition decree following the death of the son's grandfather. The grandfather had died leaving several Class I heirs under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and a 1994 compromise decree partitioned his property among them, giving the father his individual share, part of which he later sold. The son, through his mother, sued for partition in 1997, claiming the property was ancestral joint family property in which he had acquired a birthright by virtue of coparcenary.

The Court held that, under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, property devolving on a male Hindu by intestate succession after 1956 is taken by him in his individual capacity, not as the karta of a fresh joint family; the statute's plain words must prevail over any older notion that a son automatically becomes a coparcener in property his father inherits. Once the grandfather's estate was partitioned among the Class I heirs, each share became that heir's separate property, and the son therefore never acquired any coparcenary right in it by birth. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs.