Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma

Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No. 32601/2018 | 05-12-2018

1. There is a conflict of opinion in two Division Bench Judgments of this Court i.e. Prakash vs. Phulavati, (2016) 2 SCC 36 [LQ/SC/2015/1454] and Danamma @ Suman Surpur vs. Amar, (2018) 3 SCC 343 [LQ/SC/2018/130] with regard to interpretation of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005.

2. In view thereof, this matter has to be heard by a Bench of three Judge. Though we are sitting in combination of three Judge Bench, learned counsel for the respondent has drawn our attention to Order VI Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 as per which the matter is to be referred to Honble the Chief Justice and it is for the Honble Chief Justice to constitute a Bench for hearing the matter.

3. We accordingly direct the Registry to place the matter before Honble the Chief Justice for constitution of the Bench.

Advocate List
Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
Eq Citations
  • (2019) 3 SCC CIVIL 171
  • (2019) 6 SCC 162
  • LQ/SC/2018/1560
Head Note

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 — S. 6 — Succession to coparcenary property — Conflict of opinion in two Division Bench Judgments of Supreme Court with regard to interpretation of S. 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by Hindu Succession Amendment Act of 2005 — Matter referred to Honble Chief Justice for constitution of Bench