Notional partition under Hindu succession law preserves the mother's partition share while determining the deceased coparcener's interest.

Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was construed to require a notional partition immediately before a coparcener's death for the limited purpose of ascertaining the deceased's share, while also preserving a mother's pre-existing right to a share on partition in a father-son coparcenary under Hindu law. The analysis states that where the deceased leaves female heirs covered by the proviso, survivorship is excluded and the deceased's interest devolves by succession after the deemed partition is worked out. On the facts discussed, that approach resulted in the plaintiff being entitled to a one-fourth share in the suit property.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, on a proper construction of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the notional partition contemplated by Explanation 1 is confined to quantifying the deceased coparcener's share or extends so far as to recognise the share of a female relative entitled to a partition under Hindu law. (ii) On the facts of the case, what share was the plaintiff entitled to in the suit property.

Issue (i): Whether, on a proper construction of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the notional partition contemplated by Explanation 1 is confined to quantifying the deceased coparcener's share or extends so far as to recognise the share of a female relative entitled to a partition under Hindu law.

Analysis: The proviso to Section 6 excludes survivorship where the deceased leaves a female relative specified in Class I of the Schedule, and Explanation 1 requires the deceased's interest to be ascertained on the footing that a partition had taken place immediately before death. The deemed partition is therefore the machinery for determining the deceased coparcener's share for succession. Where the coparcenary consists of father and son and Hindu law would, on a partition between them, entitle the mother to a share equal to that of a son, that right is not taken away by the Act. The court treated the legal fiction as sufficient to work out the deceased's share while also giving effect to the pre-existing Hindu law right of the mother to a share on partition.

Conclusion: The notional partition under Section 6 and Explanation 1 is to be given effect to for determining the deceased coparcener's share, and in the present class of case it also preserves the mother's share on a partition between father and son.

Issue (ii): On the facts of the case, what share was the plaintiff entitled to in the suit property.

Analysis: On the deemed partition immediately before Shridhar's death, the family property was to be divided between the father and son and, applying Hindu law, the mother was also entitled to a share equal to that of a son. Shridhar's share then devolved by intestate succession upon his mother and widow. As a result, the mother first took her share on partition and also inherited a share in Shridhar's portion. On the mother's death, her interest devolved upon her husband and daughter.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was entitled to 1/4th share in the suit property.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by holding that the plaintiff's share in the suit property was 1/4th, and the matter was left to the Division Bench to proceed in accordance with that determination.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a coparcener dies leaving female heirs covered by the proviso to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the notional partition required by Explanation 1 is applied to determine the deceased's share, and in a father-son coparcenary it also preserves the mother's right to a share on partition under Hindu law.

---