The Andhra Pradesh High Court has delivered a landmark judgment affirming that a daughter is entitled to an equal share with her brother in ancestral coparcenary property. The court ruled that if a partition was not finalized before the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act came into effect, and final decree proceedings are still pending, a preliminary decree can be modified to reflect the change in law.
Case Background
The division bench comprising Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and Balaji Medamalli relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Vineeta Sharma vs Rakesh Sharma to allow interlocutory applications seeking modification of a preliminary decree passed on September 26, 2003. The case, which spanned over three decades, originated from a suit filed in 1988 concerning the properties of one Vale Mareppa.
Original Suit and Appeals
Mareppa's widow Nagamma and daughter Mandlem Veeramma sought partition against the daughters of his deceased son Busappa. The trial court in 1989 granted a one-fourth share to the widow but denied any share to the daughter. On appeal, the High Court modified the decree, granting one-sixth share each to the widow, daughter, and son in Mareppa's half share.
Impact of the 2005 Amendment
During final decree proceedings, purchasers claiming through the daughter and her legal heirs sought modification of the appellate preliminary decree, citing the 2005 amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, which confers coparcenary rights on daughters by birth. An earlier attempt before the trial court was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, a decision later upheld by the Supreme Court in February 2026. Subsequently, the petitioners approached the High Court for relief.
High Court's Observations
After examining submissions from both sides, the High Court held that a second preliminary decree can be passed in a partition suit if there is a change in law or supervening circumstances before the final decree. The bench noted that the daughter was alive on September 9, 2005, no partition had taken place before December 20, 2004, and the final decree was yet to be passed.
Modified Decree
Taking note of the mother's death, the High Court ruled that her one-sixth share would devolve equally on the daughter and the heirs of the son under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act. The court accordingly modified the 2003 decree, granting the daughter and son one-half share each in their father's half share, effectively giving each a one-fourth share of the total property. The trial court was directed to draw up the modified preliminary decree and expedite the final decree proceedings.
