1. Introduction
The concept of Karta—the functional and legal head of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)—has historically been anchored in patriarchal tradition. Under classical Mitakshara Hindu law, the eldest male coparcener has the authority to manage the property and affairs of the HUF.
However, with the advent of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, granting equal coparcenary rights to daughters, a significant jurisprudential question emerged:
Can a daughter, now a coparcener by birth, become the Karta of the HUF?
Indian courts have now answered this question decisively in the affirmative, reinforcing constitutional principles of equality and enabling a daughter to assume managerial control over ancestral property.
This article provides an exhaustive discussion on this issue, integrating statutory provisions, judicial decisions, income-tax implications, and practical guidance.
2. Legal Framework: Coparcenary and Karta
2.1 Traditional Hindu Law: Concept of Coparcenary
A coparcenary is a narrower subset within an HUF comprising male members who acquire a birthright in joint family property. Under Mitakshara law, coparceners traditionally included:
-
A father
-
His sons
-
Grandsons
-
Great-grandsons
Only coparceners had the right to:
-
Demand partition
-
Acquire interest by birth
-
Act as Karta
Until 2005, women were excluded from the coparcenary, and hence could not be Kartas.
2.2 Karta: Functions and Powers
The Karta is the de facto manager of the HUF and exercises significant powers, including:
-
Managing ancestral property and finances
-
Representing the HUF in legal and tax matters
-
Filing income tax returns (under Section 140(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961)
-
Entering contracts and conducting business on behalf of the HUF
-
Borrowing money and alienating assets under necessity
The Karta’s powers are quasi-trustee in nature and must be exercised for the benefit of the family.
3. Statutory Revolution: Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005
3.1 Pre-2005 Position
Before 2005, daughters in Mitakshara HUFs were only members, not coparceners. They could not demand partition, inherit by survivorship, or become Karta.
3.2 Section 6 as Amended
Section 6(1), Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (post 2005 Amendment):
“On and from the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, in a joint Hindu family governed by Mitakshara law, the daughter of a coparcener shall by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son...”
3.3 Key Consequences of the Amendment
-
Daughters become coparceners by birth
-
They have the same rights and liabilities as sons
-
They can demand partition, receive equal share, and represent the HUF
Though the Act was silent on the position of Karta, its language clearly vested coparcenary rights in daughters, opening the door for them to assume managerial roles.
4. Landmark Judgment: Sujata Sharma v. Manu Gupta
Delhi High Court, 2015 | Citation: 221 (2015) DLT 327
Sujata Sharma, the eldest daughter in the family, sought to be recognized as the Karta of the HUF after her father’s death. Her claim was challenged on the basis that customary law did not recognize women as Kartas.
Issue:
Whether a female coparcener, being the eldest in the family, can be appointed as Karta of the HUF.
Held:
Justice Najmi Waziri ruled:
“If a male Hindu, by birth, can be a coparcener and, therefore, be a Karta, so can a female Hindu. The absence of a son cannot be the reason to deny the eldest daughter of the coparcener her rightful place as Karta.”
Key Legal Principles:
-
The 2005 amendment removed gender-based restrictions from the Mitakshara coparcenary system.
-
The right to be a Karta flows from one’s status as a coparcener, not gender.
-
Customary disqualification cannot override statutory equality.
-
The judgment affirms that legal capacity must evolve with constitutional values.
5. Who Can Act as Karta?
| Individual | Eligible as Karta? | Legal Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Eldest male coparcener | ✅ Yes | Traditional and statutory recognition |
| Eldest daughter (post-2005) | ✅ Yes | Section 6(1) + Sujata Sharma judgment |
| Widow of coparcener | ❌ No | Not a coparcener by birth; only a member |
| Minor son/daughter | ❌ No (directly) | Can be represented through natural/legal guardian |
| Married daughter | ✅ Yes | Marriage does not extinguish coparcenary rights |
| Daughter-in-law | ❌ No | Not a coparcener by birth |
6. Income Tax and Compliance Implications
6.1 Section 140(c) – Authorized Signatory
Under the Income-tax Act, the Karta is the signatory for HUF returns. If the Karta is deceased or unavailable, any adult member may sign. After the Sujata Sharma ruling, female coparceners can be Kartas and can:
-
File the HUF’s income tax return
-
Apply for PAN in the name of the HUF
-
Operate bank accounts
-
Be the representative assessee
6.2 Property and Transactional Validity
-
Registrars must accept a female Karta’s signature on sale, gift, or transfer deeds of HUF assets.
-
Banks and financial institutions should not refuse account operation by a female Karta when validly evidenced.
7. Practical Illustration
Case Study:
-
Mr. A (father) – deceased in 2020
-
Ms. B (daughter, aged 34)
-
Master C (son, aged 16)
-
Mrs. D (wife, aged 60)
As per Section 6, Ms. B became a coparcener by birth and is now the eldest living coparcener. She has the statutory and judicial right to act as Karta of the HUF.
Mrs. D, though elder, is not a coparcener and hence cannot be Karta, unless acting as guardian for minor C.
8. Frequently Asked Legal & Tax Questions
Q1. Does marriage affect a daughter’s right to be Karta?
No. Her coparcenary rights continue despite marriage.
Q2. Can a mother be Karta of her husband’s HUF?
No. She is a member, not a coparcener. However, she may act as guardian of a minor Karta.
Q3. What if the male coparcener is younger than the daughter?
The eldest living coparcener, irrespective of gender, has the primary right to be Karta.
Q4. Is the Sujata Sharma ruling applicable pan-India?
While binding within Delhi jurisdiction, it holds strong persuasive value elsewhere unless overruled by the Supreme Court or another High Court.
Q5. Can a woman manage HUF property independently?
Yes, if she is Karta or coparcener. Even as a member, she may manage under limited authority (e.g., guardian role).
Q6. Can Income Tax authorities object to female Karta?
No. Income-tax forms and PAN applications legally recognize female Kartas if valid documentation is provided.
9. Conclusion
The evolution of coparcenary law post-2005 and judicial recognition through Sujata Sharma v. Manu Gupta has conclusively established that a woman can be the Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family.
This change reflects not only statutory intent but also a constitutional commitment to gender equality. While social acceptance may lag, the legal pathway is now unequivocally clear.
It is imperative for tax professionals, legal practitioners, and financial institutions to update their understanding and practices to accommodate and uphold the rights of women as equal stakeholders and managers of HUF property.
