Ancestral property
Satya nand aggarwal
(Querist) 17 July 2014
This query is : Resolved
Sorry for the in complete information Now My query is
1.A purchased the property in 1965 died in 1970 property goes to his two sons B and C .
C died in 1980 property goes to his son D.
D died in 1999. property goes to his son E.
E got the son F
Whether the property will be ancestral property of F who is son of E.
Please reply with reason and quote law
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 17 July 2014
Academic query.
Incomplete information.
Who is D to C? Who is E to D?
No case law is provided.
Anirudh
(Expert) 17 July 2014
The property in question is not at all ancestral in character.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 17 July 2014
agree with MR anirudh
Satya nand aggarwal
(Querist) 17 July 2014
Sorry for the in complete information Now My query is
1.A purchased the property in 1965 died in 1970 property goes to his two sons B and C .
C died in 1980 property goes to his son D.
D died in 1999. property goes to his son E.
E got the son F
Whether the property will be ancestral property of F who is son of E.
Please reply with reason and quote law
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 17 July 2014
Sorry this is not a class-room or your students where you are giving an examination.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 17 July 2014
Though your query is purely an academic even then the reply of your query is yes.
Rudrawar Narayanreddy
(Expert) 18 July 2014
incomplete information
among hindus purchaser of property dies his legal hiers shown in Schedule I wife, sons, daughters and predeceased sons or daughters children U/s 8 will become absolute owners
Satya nand aggarwal
(Querist) 18 July 2014
It is not a class-room and it should not be the class room as the most respectful and senior lawyers are the members of this club and I respect all of you with the core of my heart as I am much junior to you. But my query is very legal, genuine and complicated (at least for me). As per some authorities of law property must be coming to the decedents before the enactment of Hindu Succession act 1956 and only then it can be declared ancestral property. As per my inquiry A purchased the property after enactment of the act. Please see the judgment of Supreme Court of India Commissioner of Wealth Tax. . vs Chander Sen Etc on 16 July, 1986
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 18 July 2014
The Ancestral Property of a Hindu Family as explained is based on the Principle of Hindu law followed by the Supreme Court of India well propounded in Hindu Law by Mulla.
Previous to 2005 Amendment in the Hindu Succession Act,1956,
The Ancestral property also called Copacenary property, wherein all the male members of the Joint Hindu family were called Copaceners, the female members were enjoying the right to maintenance in such Hindu Family but not to share the right in the Hindu Family Property.
Wherever there was division of the Joint Hindu Family property or the Ancestral Property or the Copacenary property, only the male Copaceners were entailed to get share in the property not female members, after the 2005 amendment, the daughters borne in any such Joint Hindu Family will be also entitled to get equal share as the sons, in other words daughters too will be considered Copaneners of the Joint Hindu Family entitled to equal share as the sons the male Copaceners.
The four generation rule for considering a property as Ancestral or Copacenary is not made by me but that exist from time immemorial, well followed by the Indian courts.
The self acquired property of the grand father on his death without leaving a 'Will' devolves to his Class 1 Heir who in this case will be his widow, all his sons & all his daughters, in case any of his son or daughter died before his death, then the legal heir of the predeceased son or daughter will get the share which the predeceased son or daughter would have got.
The grand daughter of the grand father shall be entiled to get share of her predeceased father only, if the father is alive then she is not entiled to any share.
As far the division of the Ancestral/Copacenar property is concerned that can be sought anytime by any of the Copacener of the Joint Family.
The daughter being one of the Hindu Copacenar can now seek division of the ancestral/copacenary property as any son anytime during her lifetime.
The claim is executable at the time of partition of the ancestral/copacenary property in question, why wait for death of the father who himself is also one of the copacenar entiled to only one share as the daughter.
When the division of any Joint Hindu Family property/Copacenary Property/Ancestral Property take place each share the copacenar get becomes his or her self acquired property & doesn't remain part of the Joint Hindu Family property/Copacenary Property/Ancestral Property.
If this part of the self acquired property remains undivided in his/her family for next four generation including him/her then it acquires the same status that of Joint Hindu Family property/Copacenary Property/Ancestral Property but now here a new Joint Hindu Family takes shape with regard to the said property.
Hope you understand how self acquired property becomes ancestral/copacenary & vice versa in a Hindu Family.
Anirudh
(Expert) 18 July 2014
I am very sorry.
The querist has simply given the fact situation.
Based on this fact situation, he wants to know categorically, whether the property is 'ancestral' in character or not.
Nothing more.
The fact situation revealed is sufficient enough to give an answer and such an answer has already given by me in my earlier post. Even the querist is quite aware of the legal position (where he has very correctly cited Chander Sen's case).
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 18 July 2014
Anirudh You are correct in your approach but there is no harm if the querist is ignorant to give proper words to his query and we reply the same understandin his intention.
Anirudh
(Expert) 18 July 2014
Dear Mr. Makkad,
I never said that the qauerist has ignorant or has used improper words.
I do not know from which portion of my latest reply you got that impression.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 18 July 2014
The examinee is better than many of examiners and is well aware of correct legal situation.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 18 July 2014
Expert Mr. Prabhakar Singh is right in his observation that the examinee is more knowledgeable than the examiners here. He very well knows the legal position but hi is on the run of testing the skills of experts here. I endorse the views of expert Mr. Anirudh that the property will not become an ancestral property in the hands of E or or to Z.
Satya nand aggarwal
(Querist) 19 July 2014
Some of the experts says it is academic query and some are of the view it incomplete information and some are of the view I am on the run of testing skills of the experts.
I do not agree with any of you except on one point that was in complete information but that was in the beginning but later on It was corrected. I have specifically stated in my query that it is complicated issue for me so I am not in run to test the skills of you, the experts because as I am facing this problem. Some way SC says if the property came for grandfather or great grandfather is ancestral property without mentioning this fact about Hindu succession act but the cited authority by me above Supreme Court of India Commissioner of Wealth Tax. . vs Chander Sen Etc says it must be belonging to the family earlier to that act 1956.This is the difference between these authorities of law.So it is not a academic query and I am not testing your skills as I have learned a lot from you people and thanks a lot for the same. Special thanks to Anirudh and Prabahakar Singh
Anirudh
(Expert) 22 July 2014
Dear Satyanand Aggarwal,
Pl. do not unnecessarily linger on with your query. This stands clearly answered by saying that the property is not 'ancestral'.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 22 July 2014
The property in question does not fall under ancestral category. You may visit the referred case law and the judgement once again properly and confirm the status of the property referred to in your query yourself.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 22 July 2014
You have rightly been advised that after partition, the property lost the status of ancestral and thus the result you desire to derive, cannot come out thereto.
