At the very outset, let me come straight to the heart of the matter and begin by what has caught the eyes of the entire nation. In a landmark judgment delivered on April 20, the Supreme Court has ruled that a man is legally entitled to nominate his married daughter to own his cooperative society flat after his death thus depriving his own wife and only son. This clearly depicts that a father can give property to married daughter over son and wife. The Supreme Court thus held that a married daughter is entitled to inherit her father’s property even if his wife and son are alive!

While craving for the exclusive indulgence of my esteemed readers, I would wish to bring their undiminished attention to the glaring fact that this landmark ruling assumes significance as the WB Cooperative Societies Rules, 1987, clearly stipulate that the owner of a flat in a cooperative society can nominate his house in favour of a person “belonging to his family”. It is nowhere specified that the property has to be given to son only or wife only or only son and wife. This alone explains why Supreme Court has clearly held that father can give property to married daughter over son and wife.

For my esteemed readers exclusive benefit, I wish to draw their sole attention here to the notable fact that taking this rule as their defence, along with other provisions of the West Bengal Cooperative Societies Act, 1983, Biswa Ranjan Sengupta’s wife and son challenged the decision of the managing committee of Purbanchal Housing Estate, Salt Lake City, Kolkata to transfer ownership of a flat to Indrani Wahi who is Sengupta’s married daughter.

It would be imperative to bring out here very categorically that based on the objection, the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies declined to record the name of Indrani as the successor of the flat originally allotted to Sengupta. It must also be highlighted here that Sengupta in his last days was a very broken man and was living with her daughter Indrani Wahi. It is a no-brainer that this was so mainly because of ill-treatment to him by his wife and son which had left him totally devastated as he had never expected such a raw deal would be meted out to him by his wife and son.

Be it noted, a bench of Justices JS Khehar and C Nagappan pronounced categorically that, “There can be no doubt that where a member of a cooperative society nominates a person in consonance with provisions of the rules, on the death of such member, the cooperative society is mandated to transfer all the share or interest of such member in the name of the nominee.” They also held that, “The rights of others on account of inheritance or succession is a subservient right. Only if a member5 had not exercised the right of nomination under Section 79 of the Act, then and then alone, the existing share or interest of the member would devolve by way of succession or inheritance”. It would be pertinent to mention here that in 2013, the Supreme Court had said that a daughter’s right to ancestral property does not arise if the father died before the amendment to Hindu law came into force in 2005.

Needless to say, Indrani’s appeal was allowed by a single Judge of the High Court, which directed the flat to be registered in her name. But a division bench of the High Court said Indrani was a part shareholder of the property along with Sengupta’s wife and son and that she could dispose of the property only with the express consent of other shareholders.

Indrani appealed against this judgment in the Supreme Court. After having given its thoughtful consideration to the facts and circumstances of this particular case, the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment with far reaching consequences ruled decisively in favour of father giving property to married daughter over son and wife. The Supreme Court in this landmark case has categorically ruled that a man is legally entitled to nominate his married daughter to own his cooperative society flat after his death thus depriving his wife and only son from all their rights over his property!

-Sanjeev Sirohi,

Advocate,