A bench comprising Justices Arun Misra, S Abdul Nazir, and M R Shah ironed out confusion arising out of conflicting interpretations of the Supreme Court of the amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, which got into force from September 9, 2005. The bench said whether the father is alive or not, daughters born before September 9, 2005, can also claim equal rights in inheritance. Also Read: Sudiksha\u2019s Death, Who to Blame? Bulandshahr DM says She wasn\u2019t \u2018harassed,\u2019 The procurements include section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, which gives the status of Copartner to a daughter born as the son with the same rights and liabilities on a girl child born before or after the amendment. Justice Mishra said in a 121-page judgment, reasons can be claimed by a daughter born before September 9, 2005. However, daughters, claiming coparcenary rights, will not be able to question the settlement or separation of ancestral properties by existing coppers before December 20, 2004, as provided in section 6 amended. The court also asked other colleagues of a Hindu joint family not to be alarmed by the decision. It is only a matter of increasing the rights of daughters. Supreme Court said the rights of other relatives remain unchanged as it commanded in the proviso to Section 6 as it stood before the amendment. A three-judge bench of the supreme court also observed the retrospective application of section 6 and ruled that the daughters would get rights from 1956 when the law came into existence. However, it clarified that newly given rights through judicial examinations would not reopen the separation of parental property previously made through existing coworkers. What is Koperneri property? It is the property inherited by a Hindu from his father, grandfather, or great grandfather. Only one has the right to demand the division of assets\u2014the share in property increases or decreases by death or birth in the family. Analyzing the Mitthakara system applied in various forms for property owned by Hindu families, Justice Mishra quoted a common saying: a 1996 Supreme court ruling, to sum up, the benches' attitude towards daughters. "A son has a son until he gets a wife. A daughter is a life-long daughter. Bollywood artist Ayushmann Khurrana and\u2009Farhan Akhtar, among others, took to their social media to invite a decision by the Supreme Court of India, giving little girls equivalent rights to the legacy of hereditary property. They considered it a 'milestone choice.' A three-judge seat decided that the 2005 law, which altered the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, to state a daughter would have equal rights from the child, would likewise apply independently of whether she was born before and after the decision. Also Read: Bengaluru Violence: Section 144 Imposed, Govt. says Violence was pre-planned Ayushmann welcomed the decision and wrote on his Instagram, "The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that girls, similar to children, have an equivalent claim to acquire hereditary property and the correction to the Hindi Succession Act, 1956 will have review impact. A major advance, a fundamental advance, and I invite this decision wholeheartedly." Shraddha Kapoor, too embraced the milestone decision. Actoress took to Instagram with a clipping of the judgment, which says: "About time #Equality."