The Delhi High Court has issued a verdict, confirming that women have the full right to serve as Karta in a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), and this right is not constrained by either legislative provisions or traditional Hindu law.
In a unanimous decision by Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Suresh Kumar Kait, the court emphasized that “societal perceptions” cannot be used as a basis to deny rights granted by legislation. They argued that any interpretation suggesting that women can be coparceners but not Kartas is not only illogical but also contrary to the purpose of the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act. The court noted that historically, both men and women were considered equal, but over time, societal norms and gender roles have marginalized women.
The court underscored that the 2005 amendment granted women coparcenary rights equivalent to men, demonstrating legal reform for women’s empowerment. However, the deeply entrenched societal norms still pose a challenge to women assuming the traditionally male-dominated role of Karta in an HUF.
The bench found that Section 6 of the 2005 Amendment Act clearly states that women have the right to be Karta, along with other coparcenary rights. Interpreting the provision differently would be inconsistent with the intended purpose of the amendment. The court also clarified that while an HUF cannot have two Kartas, another coparcener can take on the management role under certain conditions.
Furthermore, the court emphasized that the rights of coparceners are not compromised when a female Karta is appointed. Coparceners retain their existing entitlements and interests, and their status remains unchanged.
In case of doubts about a female coparcener’s ability to serve as Karta or concerns about undue influence from in-laws, the court stated that other coparceners have legal avenues to seek partition or challenge wrongful property alienation.
The argument that a female Karta’s spouse would indirectly influence the HUF’s operations was dismissed by the court as a “parochial mindset.” The court referenced Section 14 of the 1956 Act, which grants women the right to be the absolute owner of their property, and emphasized that denying a woman ownership and authority based on the potential influence of in-laws is illogical.
The court concluded that social concerns and opposition should not hinder legislation aimed at eliminating patriarchal discrimination. These remarks were made in response to a petition challenging a previous ruling that allowed the oldest female coparcener to serve as Karta in an HUF. Additionally, Sujata Sharma was designated as the Karta of the HUF “D.R. Gupta & Sons HUF” by the court.
