LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Vasanth K R (business)     24 February 2012

Can ancestral property becom self aquired property?

A, B & C were brothers belonged to hindu undivided family, they had immovable ancestral properties, and they had joint business firm. In 1954 due to differences they came to a conclusion for a final settlement with regard to the immovable properties. On going through the accounts they found that the share of assets of B & C was equal to the share of liabilities in joint family business firm. So, B & C found that it is not possible for them to continue as co-sharers of immovable properties. So, they executed a release deed (themselves and on behalf of there minor male issues)in favour of A alone (the names of minor male issues of A is not mentioned in the deed} and gave up all rights and interests in entire immovable properties for which each of them received Rs.4ooo/- as consideration from A. My question is- by paying consideration to B and C did the entire ancestral properties became self acquired properties of A? Presently the dispute is between three male issues of A about the chareterstic of the property as because A has executed a will in favour of only two sons. So, I am asking this question with regard to male issues of A, for them it remains as ancestral property or it becomes self acquired property of there father (that is A)?



Learning

 8 Replies

niranjan (civil practice)     29 February 2012

In my opinion the ancestral properties could not have become the properties of business firm.Further the ancestral properties should have been divided amongst all the coparceners and after that they couldhave thrown that property in business firm according to their share.So that part in your question is missing. Simply because from business firm two parters have with drawn their share,the property remaining in the hands of A would still remain ancestral property and sons of A have their share as coparcener.Moreover,male sons of B and C are also coparcener by birth and their right cannot be dissolved by their father.So I think that first of all share of all coparceners i.e. A B C and their sons/daughters should first be decided and then it can be said that the property remaining in the hands of individual,can be said self acquired property.

Vasanth K R (business)     01 March 2012

No, the ancestral property was not divided amongst the coparceners, it remained jointly with all three brothers till the abovesaid release deed in1954, after the release deed entire property continued with A alone.  Even the joint family business firm came to the part of A,B & C heriditically through there ancestors

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     01 March 2012

Vasanth! Gud evening.

 

We should not forget year 1954 which is prior to HSA 1956. B & C lost their all shares in the immovable properties by way of their registered Release Deed along-with their all natural heirs/coparceners as all of them were minor.

 

Now the property inherited by a to the extent of 1/3 share remains as ancestral and this 2/3 share received by way of release deed shall be treated as his self acqired.

 

A can bequeth his 2/3 share by way of will or otherwise but his 1/3 share which is clearly identifiable cannot bequeth by way of will.

 

The left over son of A can claim his share out of this 1/3 share and not from entire property in views of afooresaid clarification.

Vasanth K R (business)     02 March 2012

But Sir, after the abovesaid 1954 release deed A got totally three immovable properties  out of them two properties were sold by A in 1955, for Rs.16,500/- . for the purpose of clearing family debts, for investment in family business firm, for maintenance of family (these purposes have been mentioned in sale deed of both properties), Its clear thad A had thrown all three properties under one common hotchpot. At the time of sale of two properties A had one major and two minor male issues, who were also involved in the activity of family business firm, under these circumstances what will be the characteristic of the remaining single property?

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     02 March 2012

The facts you mentioned here had not been mentioned by you earlier so none can anticipate and provide reply as desired. In case A had sold 2 properties during the year 1955 for family requirement then the same shall be decuted from the total properties under hold of A and rest of the properties shall be treated as per my previous reply.

 

So far business of firm is concerned, the same shall be treated as of HUF of A and its distribution shall be made accordingly.

Vasanth K R (business)     03 March 2012

Why cant the existing single property treated as joint family property and all male issues got rights over the property by birth as coparceners?

Raj Kumar Makkad (Adv P & H High Court Chandigarh)     04 March 2012

B & C had lrelinquished their shares by registered deed so that ptroperty became self acquired of A which was 2/3 and 1/3 was his ancestral. After sale of 2/3 share of his properties the remaining property shall be designated in the same proportion.

Vasanth K R (business)     17 March 2012

Any opinions from others please?


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register