Inherited property is exclusive property?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 10 June 2011
This query is : Resolved
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir, in my one query dated 22.5.2011 your goodself reply with confidence that “ the self acquired property of father inherited by his son after the death of father will be his exclusive property as per Section-8 of HSA 1956 and it will be not his ancestral property and the son has the liberty to gift it to anybody he wants. Since it is not an ancestral property, the provisions of HSA (Amendment) Act, 2005 will have no application at all to the matter.”
But Sir, while going through Sec-8 of HSA 1956 it has been learnt that this section-8 speaks only about the Class-I & class-II heir and nothing more.
Sir, I have read your many replies of different authors and all your replies are best one. Hence I believe that said reply must be correct. So will you please paste some court order/ Concerned para of HSA 1956 in support of your reply.
bhagwat patil
(Expert) 11 June 2011
Property acquired by way will is self acquired one.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 11 June 2011
If the father died intestate then his legal heirs will get the equal rights over the property.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 11 June 2011
So instantly i see here a problem "A" a Hindu governed by MITAKSHRA SCHOOL, exclusively owns property created by him from his own earnings,dies INTESTATE in the year1958,living behind him,"B" as son and "d"as grand son and "e"as great grand son while "d" and"e"each have one son on As' death. IS here any coparcenary formed with relation to property left by "A"???
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 11 June 2011
Read full hindu succession act.
I reproduce relevant sections as under.............
9. Order of succession among heirs in the Schedule.-
Among the heirs specified in the Schedule, those in class I shall take simultaneously and to the exclusion of all other heirs, those in the first entry in class II shall be preferred to those in the second entry, those in the second entry shall be preferred to those in the third entry, and so on in succession.
further more.
19. Mode of succession of two or more heirs.- If two or more heirs succeed together to the property of an intestate, they shall take the property:-
(a) save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, per capita and not per stripes, and
(b) as tenants-in common and not as joint tenants.
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 11 June 2011
reply to problem of prabhakar sir,
A died leaving his self acquired property so succession would be governed by sec 8 and no coparcenary has been created. Rules of succession would apply as sec- 8, 9 and 19.
Per capita means per head and per stripes means per branch. So in your problem first property will go to "B" excluding all other heirs, i.e. C D E. and It would have holding absolute rights of B upon such property as tenants in common as per section 19.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 11 June 2011
Dear Anonymous,
I would have appreciated if you had asked your present query in the same thread in which I had answered earlier. That will give a proper perspective and context.
However, since you have quoted my answer verbatim, I would have no difficulty in relating my answer and the context in which I had answered so.
To your pointed query, please see the attached note.
Hope this clarifies your doubt.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 11 June 2011
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir, Again many many thanks with the depth of my heart for answering complete and specific reply.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 12 June 2011
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir, from the above discussion I want query in the matter further:-
Although the property in question was exclusive property and my father executed Release deed in JULY 2005 in favour of both the son and nothing given to my two sisters. In the Release deed my father mentioned that the said land is ancestral and the Revenue department registered the Release deed without going through that is it really Ancestral or not. As exclusive property can be given to us by Gift Deed and not by Release Deed.
Now on discussion with a lawyer he says that When your father in the Release deed states that it is ancestral then now it will be treated as ancestral and hence your sisters is in the position to challenge this Release deed and can ask for her share as per HSA(amended)2005.
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir, Please guide me how to face this problem now?
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 12 June 2011
If your father had stated that it was ancestral property, there might be some reason for it.
In that case, in order to find out whether your sisters are entitled to any share, you have to indicate (i) whether your father is alive if not date of death(ii) whether your mother is alive if not date of death (iii) the date on which your sisters got married.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 13 June 2011
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir,My father stated it as ancestral property with the view that as it is not self earned hence ancestral. My Father and Mother both are alive and the Sisters are married in Year 1986 and 1997 respectively.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 14 June 2011
Respected R.Ramachandran Sir,my above query is pending.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 14 June 2011
It is very nice to know that both your parents are alive. Let them live very long.
Originally when you said that the property was self-acquired, I provided the answer.
Thereafter when you said that the property has been indicated by your father as 'ancestral' I gave the answer.
Now you say that the property indeed was inherited and therefore self-acquired, but your father had indicated it as 'ancestral property' to say that he did not self-earn it.
I believe that your lawyer would have certainly gone through the old documents as well and that is why he has also come to the conclusion that the property is ancestral.
In case you feel that it is not ancestral, then to know whether the property is 'ancestral' or 'personal property' one has to go through the documents. You will agree with me that without going through the documents, it will not be possible to give any view.
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 16 June 2011
I add this judgement.....
To discriminate separate and coprcenary property these mile stone judgements should be studied....
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1427996/
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/916214/
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 21 June 2011
Thanks to R.Ramchandaran Sir & Ravikant Soni Sir for adequate reply.
