Daughter’s right to inherit ancestral property and impact of recent changes in law — MCQs

All questions with answers and explanations

Read the full set here, or use the practice card above to test yourself one question at a time.

1. Under Section 6(5), a partition effected before 20 December 2004 is protected only if it was by:

   • An oral family agreement
   • A registered instrument of partition or a final court decree (correct answer)
   • A memorandum signed by all members
   • A verbal promise before witnesses

   Explanation. Only a registered partition deed or a final court decree qualifies under the Section 6(5) saving clause.

2. For a daughter's coparcenary right to be claimed, Vineeta Sharma held that:

   • Both father and daughter must be alive on 9 September 2005
   • Only the daughter needs to be alive on 9 September 2005; the father's survival is irrelevant (correct answer)
   • Only the father needs to be alive
   • Neither needs to be alive

   Explanation. Vineeta Sharma held that only the daughter's survival to 9 September 2005 matters; the father need not have been alive.

3. A daughter who died before 9 September 2005:

   • Can still retroactively claim coparcenary status through her heirs
   • Cannot acquire coparcenary status she never lived to hold (correct answer)
   • Automatically becomes a coparcener posthumously
   • Is treated the same as a living daughter

   Explanation. A daughter who predeceased the amendment cannot retroactively acquire coparcenary status she never lived to hold.

4. The 2005 Amendment's effect is best described as:

   • Fully retrospective, reopening every past transaction
   • Retroactive — recognising a pre-existing birthright without disturbing genuinely concluded past transactions (correct answer)
   • Prospective only, applying from 2005 onward with no reference to birth
   • Applicable only to future-born daughters

   Explanation. The amendment is retroactive, not retrospective — it recognises a birthright without unsettling formally concluded past partitions.

5. A partition suit filed in 1998, still pending in 2005 with no final decree:

   • Is unaffected by the 2005 Amendment
   • Must be decided applying the daughter's enhanced coparcenary right (correct answer)
   • Automatically closes without a decree
   • Reverts to pre-1956 law

   Explanation. Partition by court decree means the final decree. A suit with no final decree on 9 September 2005 is not a saved partition, so the daughter's right applies.

6. Section 6(2) ensures that a daughter's coparcenary interest:

   • Cannot be willed away
   • Carries full incidents of ownership, including testamentary power (correct answer)
   • Is limited to her lifetime only
   • Reverts to her brothers on her death

   Explanation. Section 6(2) gives her interest full ownership incidents, including the power to dispose of it by will.

7. Under Vineeta Sharma, an oral partition is accepted only:

   • Whenever the family says it took place
   • In exceptional cases, on very cogent and contemporaneous public documents or long continuous evidence (correct answer)
   • Never, in any case
   • If it is registered after 2005

   Explanation. The Court accepts an oral partition only in exceptional cases, and the person pleading it carries a heavy burden of proof.

8. The requirement of registration or a court decree to prove a pre-2005 partition exists mainly to:

   • Generate stamp duty revenue
   • Prevent families from defeating the reform through fabricated or undocumented claims (correct answer)
   • Simplify tax filing
   • Speed up court processes

   Explanation. The formal-proof requirement prevents families from circumventing the reform with convenient, undocumented oral claims.