Effect of Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 remains intact

I read the article “A quiet burial to women’s rights in patrimony?” (23 Dec) penned  by the most erudite Prof Virendra Kumar wherein he contended that the Hindu Succession  (Amendment) Act, 2005 has been  surreptitiously struck off the Statute Book by the Repealing and Amending Act, 2015 and thereby attempt to dismantle disparity between sons and daughters in the matters of equitable division of ancestral property has been done to death .  However, it is respectfully submitted  that  said Act of 2015 merely had the effect of  repealing the Acts enlisted therein  which had become redundant since appropriate  amendments had already been made in various principal legislations pursuant thereto. Since the provisions of the amending Act of 2005 had already been incorporated in the principal legislation ie Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and hence, effect of  Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 still remains intact notwithstanding its repeal by the Repealing and Amending Act of 2015. Therefore, record needs to be put straight.

Dr RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

( I emailed the above piece to the TRIBUNE on 27 Dec 2015 but it was not published. However, a clarification from THE MOST ERUDITE & ACCLAIMED JURIST Prof Virendra Kumar appeared in the TRIBUNE in the form of “LETTER TO THE EDITOR” on 28 Dec 2015 which reads thus:)

Burial to women's rights

THE TRIBUNE, NEW DELHI, 28 Dec 2015

In my piece “A quiet burial to women’s rights in patrimony” (December 22, 2015), I concluded by saying that “should we repeal the amending Act of 2005 that sought to destroy perpetuation of discrimination merely on grounds of sex, and give it a quiet  burial for returning to the hoary past without any debate, discussion or deliberation?”

While doing so, inadvertently I failed to take note of the silent saving contained in Section 4 of the Repealing Act, 2015, which has been interpreted recently by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court by holding that “by virtue of the Repealing and Amending Act 2015 the amendment made to Hindu Succession Act in 2005 became part of the Act and the same is given retrospective effect from the day of the Principal Act came into force in the year 1956 as if the said amended provision was in operation at that time.” Though the retrospective-effect-proposition of the Bench is flawed in view of the latest ruling of the SC, the former proposition stands. 

But, I still feel, as I have stated earlier, “The aberrations to the amending Act should be removed by giving the daughter an equal share in patrimony without resorting to the quick-fix of making her a ‘coparcener’ as envisaged in Section 6 of the amending Act of 2005. This would do justice to the daughter, without disrupting the joint family setup.”

Virendra Kumar, Chandigarh