Woman can be Karta of Hindu Undivided Family: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently held that neither the legislature nor the traditional Hindu Law in any way limits the rights of a woman to be a Karta (head) of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) [Manu Gupta v Sujata Sharma & Ors]. .The division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said the only hindrance to a woman today becoming the Karta was the reluctance of a family to accept the social and cultural change. “Societal perceptions cannot be a reason to deny the rights expressly conferred by legislature,” the Court underscored..The Court was hearing an appeal against a judgment declaring a woman as the Karta of a HUF in the case of DR Gupta and sons. After all the sons of DR Gupta passed away, the question arose regarding the Karta of the family. Sujata Sharma, who was one of the grandchildren of DR Gupta, claimed to be the next Karta of the HUF as she was the eldest. She was challenged by the male relatives of her family and one Manu Gupta declared himself as the Karta instead..The Court in the decision dated December 4, noted that the Hindu Succession Act was amended in 2005 to give equal inheritance rights to Hindu men and women.It then considered the question of whether recognition of a woman as coparcener can lead to her becoming a Karta to assume the management of the family property.The Court concluded that seniority by age and the status of being a coparcener are the only necessary qualifications to become a Karta. It observed that while the traditional law nowhere proscribed a woman from being a manager but the requirement of being the “senior most male” was the necessary corollary as only male members of Joint Hindu Family were given the status of a coparcener.“This limitation has been redressed by Amendment to Section 6 of the Act, 1956 which now confers the equal status of Coparcener on woman equating her rights to be at par with a son. Therefore, having acquired the status of Coparcener, the respondent No.1 [Sujata Sharma] should be entitled to acquire the status of Karta,” it added..Looking into Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, the Court said the provision clearly states that that “a daughter of a coparcener shall by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as a son and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara Coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener.”In this backdrop, the Court said though the reference in the Preamble of the Act may be to inheritance, the conferring of “same” rights would include all other rights including the right to be a Karta.The Court rejected the argument that the husband of a female Karta would have an indirect control over the activities of the HUF of her father’s family. It called it a parochial mindset.“Ergo, a woman who has absolute ownership in a property cannot be denied a right to manage it on the warped reasoning that she may get influenced by her in-laws. Thus, societal apprehension and reluctance can never truncate legislative enactments to do away with patriarchal discrimination,” the bench said..Thus, the Court declared Sujata Sharma as the Karta for the purposes of representing the HUF of DR Gupta & Sons before the Competent Authority. It thus dismissed the appeal. Advocates Aslam Ahmed, Charu Shriyam Singh and Abhishek Dwivedi represented the appellant.Advocate Aakanksha Kaul was Amicus Curiae in the case and appeared with Advocates Manek Singh, Aman Sahani and Harsh Ojha.Advocate Mala Goel represented the main defendant. Advocates Anita Trehan, Dr. Sarita Dhuper, Kajal Chandra, Prerna Chopra, Divye Puri Sakshi Anand, Brajesh Kr. Srivastava, Deo Prakash Sharma, Manoj Yadav and Umesh Kr. Gupta represented other respondents.[Read Judgment]