Daughter share - partition suit

we are a hindu family

Madam,

You both sister first send a legal notice for partition and thereafter if your brother did not agrees then file a suit for partition.

Thanks

In a recent ruling by Supreme Court the right of women seeking equal share in ancestral property will not give property rights to a daughter if the father died before the amendment came into force. The Supreme observed that the father would have had to be alive on Sep 9th, 2005, if the daughter were to become a co-sharer with her male siblings. The HSA 1956, originally did not give daughters inheritance rights in ancestral property. They can only ask for a right to sustenance from a joint Hindu family. But this was removed by an amendment to the Act on 9th Sep, 2005. The Supreme had added another disqualification for women regarding their right of inheritance that, if the property had been alienated or partitioned before Dec 20th, 2004, this authority makes it imperative for the father to have been alive when the amendment came into force. The supreme held that daughters cannot reopen the transaction  that the alienation of ancestral property, including its partition, which had taken place before Dec 20th, 2004, in accordance with the Law applicable at that time, would remain unaffected by the 2005 Amendment.

manoj

advocate

8686159292

Some expert should give a clear opinion, as many daughters are being lured by unscrupulous elements that they are eligible for share, and every day there are one or two cases filed on partition, and in every court there are more than 300 such partition suits filed by such daughters, burdening the courts and innocent litigants.

Even after such 2005 SC Judgment, there are several judgments given by Principal District Judges, for share in ancestral property to daughters whose father has expired before 1975, and even when there was earlier partition.

Eventhough your father had inherted the property from his father/grandfather, the property need not be ancestral. Please verify.

Even if ancestral, you have share in the intestate propety of the parents.

Try for an amicable settlement, else file a partition suit.

hello,
what if there i NO partition done at all even priror to 2005 and it is still considred joint in nature. is the above clause of father being alive for daughter to get still applicable?

i say ancestral, because my father being the only son to his parents. and this property being bought by my grandparents.have doc registerd by my granfather...but there is NO mutation done as such and my father seem to have just inherited from his father as such after their death.

basing on registered sale deed the title of the owner can be identified, mutation is not necessary

manoj

advocate

8686159292

You may seek partition by filing partion suit

If the property has been bought by grandfather and father inherited it being the sole legal heir, it is not ancestral. Mutation in revenue or municipal records do not, by themselves,  constitute title to property, 

@venu,
when you say not ancestral, you mean to say - t is now  considered a self acquired of my father or we daughters have no rights at all. each of the above replies so far , n all the above, seem to have differnet opinions.
please clarify

Yes, it had been the self acquired property of your father and the property that is intestate is jointly with all the legal heirs.