Breaking Barriers: Challenges and Progress in Daughters' Inheritance in Nepal
July 31, 2025
min read
Abstract
This article examines the struggle to ensure the right of daughters to ancestral property. It traces the discrimination rooted in religious and social beliefs that denied the recognition of daughters as a coparcener and reflects on how the legislative reforms and efforts from women led organizations shaped gender equality in Nepal. It shows the journey from granting limited rights to daughters to the constitutional guarantee of equal property rights with historical cases and relevant judicial decisions.
Introduction
Property refers to things in which a person obtains the right of ownership and possession. A person’s capacity to fully exercise such rights are guaranteed by the law through property rights. Law provides property rights without any distinction based on sex or gender. But, the discrimination between man and woman regarding the property rights has been exercised in practice justifying it with religious norms and social culture. Such discrimination prevails specially against women regarding their rights over ancestral/parental property.
Parental property refers to the property of the parents of an individual which has been passed down through the ancestors. Under Hindu Legal System, there are two schools which determine the rules of Hindu law:
● Mitakshara School
● Dayabhaga School
A Mitakshara school of law is a system where man was entitled as an owner of such property from his birth but women did not even have the right to claim it being an offspring of such parents.1 However, daughters have inheritance right over her father’s property under Dayabhaga school of Hindu Law.2 Nepalese laws were made under the influence of Hindu legal system from ages which used to justify the discrimination made against daughters under Mitakshara school. So, property rights of women were established through her marital life which makes it clear that she was only entitled to the property of her husband in the traditional society.
Nepalese laws on daughter’s right over parental property
Nepalese legal system has evolved through various religious textbooks and compiled rules made by the kings of different periods like Mundhum in (Kirant), Manavnyayasastra during (Malla), 26 edicts of (Ramshah) and Divyaupadesh during (Shah) period etc. These laws used to guide ancient Nepal and not any specific provision were made regarding the rights of daughters over ancestral/ parental property. Women were provided with the property rights like right over her own earnings, stridhan (Stridhan refers to the gifts received by a woman before marriage or in front of the nuptial fire from her parents, brothers and other relatives.), right over her husband’s property but right over her parent’s property was only made limited to the extent of inheritance in cases there is no male heirs in the family who could inherit such property.
Muluki Ain 1910 BS
The Muluki Ain provided very limited rights to daughters over her parent’s property through brothers which was determined under their marital status. Brothers were required to give marriage expenses to unmarried sisters below the age of 35 years at the time of partition and unmarried sisters above 35 years of age were entitled to equal share of the property as the son. She is entitled to keep her share of property even if she got married after the partition except when she elopes.3
New Muluki Ain 2020 BS
Despite having a provision for limited right over parental property of an unmarried daughter in 1910 Muluki Ain, it narrowed down the legal right of acquiring property from parents to the unmarried daughter who is of more than 35 years of age with the restriction that she must return such property to her brothers after deducing marriage expenses once she got married.
In 2052 B.S, the Supreme Court of Nepal stated “if the person who is in a position to make partition gives a share of the property to the daughter who has not attained 35 years of age and is unmarried, then such property is under her ownership and after attaining a legal age (16) she can use such property as per her wish.4
CEDAW and Nepal’s promise to maintain equality
When Nepal became a state party ratifying CEDAW in 1991 A.D without any reservation, there was an obligation to eliminate discrimination against women as per the spirit of CEDAW. Even though Nepal has made commitments in the International Women’s Conference (Beijing), UDHR, CEDAW and other international instruments, many discriminatory provisions were still prevailing and no steps were taken by the state.
Under the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 2047 B.S. there was a guarantee of right to equality stating every citizen shall be equal before law and no one should be discriminated on any basis.5
Adv. Meera Kumari Dhungana on behalf of FWLD filed a writ petition in supreme court claiming that the provision of Muluki Ain regarding the property right of daughter is inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of equality as it has a discriminatory provision on the basis of sex and marital status of a person.
In 2052 B.S. The Supreme Court of Nepal pronounced legislative reform through directive order to introduce a bill to amend Muluki Ain to grant equal property rights to daughters as per her fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution. After such a decision from the Supreme Court, the Muluki Ain was amended for 11th time in 2059 B.S and it mentioned ‘Unmarried women of all age shall be entitled with right to partition over ancestral property but after her marriage she has to return back to her parents.’ However this amendment provided rights to all the daughters, it still discriminated against her based on marital status by obliging to return such property after marriage.
So, to guarantee daughter’s right over ancestral property without any obligation to return, in 2063 B.S. The Supreme Court stated that ‘Unmarried women of all ages shall be entitled with right to partition and she doesn't have to return partition even after getting married. But the married daughter shall not be entitled with the right to partition.6
Constitution of Nepal 2072
Even after providing constitutional guarantee, international commitments and landmark decisions for the protection of right to equality, the discrimination was still prevailing in practice and it couldn’t be completely reformed before the promulgation of Constitution of Nepal 2072 B.S.
To maintain gender equality, the provision was made in 2072 to make the married woman a coparcener by amending some Nepal laws, and the Country Civil Code 2074 has given continuity to it.
With the change of time, the definition of paternal property and personal property, and the process of the use and transfer of the property from partition have changed, and it is being reformed. The law has made provision that all offspring shall have the equal right to the ancestral property without discrimination on the ground of gender7 and every woman shall have equal lineage right without gender-based discrimination.8
Over a recent judgement on determining the date from when married daughters should have right to take part in partition, the Supreme Court held, Constitution of Nepal 2072 guaranteed ‘Right to Equality’ and based on article 18 of the constitution, Muluki Ain was amended on 10th Ashwin 2072 B.S. Since claimant has made claim as a married daughter in 2059 B.S, she can’t be granted with the right over parental property. There was not any legal provision to recognize married daughters as a coparcener before 2072 B.S.9
Muluki Civil Code 2074
It has recognized daughters as successor of the property under section 239 and other provisions like a daughter is coparcener of ancestral property10 the property in partition cannot be transferred or sold without the permission of all the coparceners11, no rights for coparcener on the personal property of others, the separation to be made at any time according to the wishes of the coparcener, the sons and daughters or the wife can live separately by acquiring her property in partition12 has guaranteed the legal right of daughters over ancestral property.
Conclusion
The wave of feminist movement and the Supreme Court of Nepal have played an important role for the establishment of rights of women for property in partition and in family matters. The subject of the daughter getting the part of property in partition has been guaranteed for married woman after 2074, Right to have equal partition share, which has been enshrined as the fundamental right under Constitution of Nepal and it has guaranteed the participation of women in each and every family matter, and the use, utilization and acquisition of property which provides woman with her exclusive economic right on her personal earnings and the property acquired before and after the marriage.
This article examines the struggle to ensure the right of daughters to ancestral property. It traces the discrimination rooted in religious and social beliefs that denied the recognition of daughters as a coparcener and reflects on how the legislative reforms and efforts from women led organizations shaped gender equality in Nepal. It shows the journey from granting limited rights to daughters to the constitutional guarantee of equal property rights with historical cases and relevant judicial decisions.
Introduction
Property refers to things in which a person obtains the right of ownership and possession. A person’s capacity to fully exercise such rights are guaranteed by the law through property rights. Law provides property rights without any distinction based on sex or gender. But, the discrimination between man and woman regarding the property rights has been exercised in practice justifying it with religious norms and social culture. Such discrimination prevails specially against women regarding their rights over ancestral/parental property.
Parental property refers to the property of the parents of an individual which has been passed down through the ancestors. Under Hindu Legal System, there are two schools which determine the rules of Hindu law:
● Mitakshara School
● Dayabhaga School
A Mitakshara school of law is a system where man was entitled as an owner of such property from his birth but women did not even have the right to claim it being an offspring of such parents.1 However, daughters have inheritance right over her father’s property under Dayabhaga school of Hindu Law.2 Nepalese laws were made under the influence of Hindu legal system from ages which used to justify the discrimination made against daughters under Mitakshara school. So, property rights of women were established through her marital life which makes it clear that she was only entitled to the property of her husband in the traditional society.
Nepalese laws on daughter’s right over parental property
Nepalese legal system has evolved through various religious textbooks and compiled rules made by the kings of different periods like Mundhum in (Kirant), Manavnyayasastra during (Malla), 26 edicts of (Ramshah) and Divyaupadesh during (Shah) period etc. These laws used to guide ancient Nepal and not any specific provision were made regarding the rights of daughters over ancestral/ parental property. Women were provided with the property rights like right over her own earnings, stridhan (Stridhan refers to the gifts received by a woman before marriage or in front of the nuptial fire from her parents, brothers and other relatives.), right over her husband’s property but right over her parent’s property was only made limited to the extent of inheritance in cases there is no male heirs in the family who could inherit such property.
Muluki Ain 1910 BS
The Muluki Ain provided very limited rights to daughters over her parent’s property through brothers which was determined under their marital status. Brothers were required to give marriage expenses to unmarried sisters below the age of 35 years at the time of partition and unmarried sisters above 35 years of age were entitled to equal share of the property as the son. She is entitled to keep her share of property even if she got married after the partition except when she elopes.3
New Muluki Ain 2020 BS
Despite having a provision for limited right over parental property of an unmarried daughter in 1910 Muluki Ain, it narrowed down the legal right of acquiring property from parents to the unmarried daughter who is of more than 35 years of age with the restriction that she must return such property to her brothers after deducing marriage expenses once she got married.
In 2052 B.S, the Supreme Court of Nepal stated “if the person who is in a position to make partition gives a share of the property to the daughter who has not attained 35 years of age and is unmarried, then such property is under her ownership and after attaining a legal age (16) she can use such property as per her wish.4
CEDAW and Nepal’s promise to maintain equality
When Nepal became a state party ratifying CEDAW in 1991 A.D without any reservation, there was an obligation to eliminate discrimination against women as per the spirit of CEDAW. Even though Nepal has made commitments in the International Women’s Conference (Beijing), UDHR, CEDAW and other international instruments, many discriminatory provisions were still prevailing and no steps were taken by the state.
Under the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal 2047 B.S. there was a guarantee of right to equality stating every citizen shall be equal before law and no one should be discriminated on any basis.5
Adv. Meera Kumari Dhungana on behalf of FWLD filed a writ petition in supreme court claiming that the provision of Muluki Ain regarding the property right of daughter is inconsistent with the constitutional guarantee of equality as it has a discriminatory provision on the basis of sex and marital status of a person.
In 2052 B.S. The Supreme Court of Nepal pronounced legislative reform through directive order to introduce a bill to amend Muluki Ain to grant equal property rights to daughters as per her fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution. After such a decision from the Supreme Court, the Muluki Ain was amended for 11th time in 2059 B.S and it mentioned ‘Unmarried women of all age shall be entitled with right to partition over ancestral property but after her marriage she has to return back to her parents.’ However this amendment provided rights to all the daughters, it still discriminated against her based on marital status by obliging to return such property after marriage.
So, to guarantee daughter’s right over ancestral property without any obligation to return, in 2063 B.S. The Supreme Court stated that ‘Unmarried women of all ages shall be entitled with right to partition and she doesn't have to return partition even after getting married. But the married daughter shall not be entitled with the right to partition.6
Constitution of Nepal 2072
Even after providing constitutional guarantee, international commitments and landmark decisions for the protection of right to equality, the discrimination was still prevailing in practice and it couldn’t be completely reformed before the promulgation of Constitution of Nepal 2072 B.S.
To maintain gender equality, the provision was made in 2072 to make the married woman a coparcener by amending some Nepal laws, and the Country Civil Code 2074 has given continuity to it.
With the change of time, the definition of paternal property and personal property, and the process of the use and transfer of the property from partition have changed, and it is being reformed. The law has made provision that all offspring shall have the equal right to the ancestral property without discrimination on the ground of gender7 and every woman shall have equal lineage right without gender-based discrimination.8
Over a recent judgement on determining the date from when married daughters should have right to take part in partition, the Supreme Court held, Constitution of Nepal 2072 guaranteed ‘Right to Equality’ and based on article 18 of the constitution, Muluki Ain was amended on 10th Ashwin 2072 B.S. Since claimant has made claim as a married daughter in 2059 B.S, she can’t be granted with the right over parental property. There was not any legal provision to recognize married daughters as a coparcener before 2072 B.S.9
Muluki Civil Code 2074
It has recognized daughters as successor of the property under section 239 and other provisions like a daughter is coparcener of ancestral property10 the property in partition cannot be transferred or sold without the permission of all the coparceners11, no rights for coparcener on the personal property of others, the separation to be made at any time according to the wishes of the coparcener, the sons and daughters or the wife can live separately by acquiring her property in partition12 has guaranteed the legal right of daughters over ancestral property.
Conclusion
The wave of feminist movement and the Supreme Court of Nepal have played an important role for the establishment of rights of women for property in partition and in family matters. The subject of the daughter getting the part of property in partition has been guaranteed for married woman after 2074, Right to have equal partition share, which has been enshrined as the fundamental right under Constitution of Nepal and it has guaranteed the participation of women in each and every family matter, and the use, utilization and acquisition of property which provides woman with her exclusive economic right on her personal earnings and the property acquired before and after the marriage.
References
[1]
Vijnaneshwara, Mitakshara: A Commentary on the Yajnavalkya Smriti (trans. Ganga Nath Jha, 2d ed. 1916).
[2]
Jimutavahana, Dayabhaga: A Treatise on the Hindu Law of Inheritance (trans. H.T. Colebrooke, 1810).
[3]
Forum for Women, Law and Development (FWLD), Baseline Study on Inheritance Rights of Women pg 4 (2009) (accessed on 20th july 2025)
[9]
Sapana Pradhan and Mahesh Poudel’s Opinion on Giving a Share to Married Daughters Is in the Minority, OnlineKhabar (July 22, 2025)
About the Authors
Asmita Pandey
Asmita is an undergraduate student in Nepal law Campus, with a keen interest in commercial law and gender justice. Passionate about legal research, civic awareness and critical analysis over complex legal issues.
View all posts by Asmita Pandey