Vishwambhar Namdev Nikam and Another v. Sow. Sunanda Maheshankar Suryawanshi and Others

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in Vishwambhar Namdev Nikam and Another v. Sow. Sunanda Maheshankar Suryawanshi and Others (decided on September 3, 2025), ruled that a granddaughter cannot directly claim a share in her maternal grandfather’s ancestral property during her mother’s lifetime.

In this case, the plaintiff, a granddaughter, filed a suit seeking partition and possession of her maternal grandfather’s agricultural land. She argued that since her mother was one of the daughters of the family, she was entitled to half of her mother’s share. The defendants objected, saying she had no right to demand partition while her mother was alive.

The Court examined Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which gives daughters equal rights in ancestral property as sons. However, the Court clarified that this right is limited to daughters of a coparcener and not to granddaughters through their mothers. A granddaughter does not become a coparcener by birth in her maternal grandfather’s property.

Relying on the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s ruling in Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma, the Hon’ble High Court explained that the maternal granddaughter’s interest in the property is what the law calls an “obstructed heritage or sapratibandha daya”. This means her right to inherit is blocked by the presence of a living person who has a prior claim i.e., her mother. She can inherit the property only by succession if she survives her mother, but not as a coparcener by birth.

Since the plaintiff’s mother was alive and had not claimed any share herself, the Court held that the granddaughter’s claim was premature. It allowed the defendants’ application and rejected the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Source

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/68b9fab9f964826458ff104e