Grand father property
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 05 December 2011
This query is : Resolved
Dear Experts,
My name is swetha from bangalore,
My father long back have above 10 acer of land, this land my father got from my grand father , my grand father passed away in 1974 , my grandfather got this land from my great grandfather, my father have two brother and two sister, my father brothers got the share in the property, but did not got any thing my father sisters. When my father brothers got the share in the property remaining property is 10 acer got my father(Total property is 30 acer).In our joint family my father have three daughter and one son. Before my father passed away in 2008 all property (10 acer) changing in to my brother name by Registration in sub registrar office in 7/8/2004.Who is have three daughter for my father we are not got any property share in our father property. My first sister is married in 1984, second sister is married in 1990 and I got married in 2000. Now the question is we all three approach to court we can expect something or not.(My mother is still alive, My mother is also have one acer land in her name Pls tell what about this.)
Please give me good suggestion,
Thank U.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 05 December 2011
The entire property left by your father would not have been inherited in the sole name of your brother as you sisters as well as your mother is also entitled to inherit share therein so you may challenge the registration of 2004 and may get your share.
M.Sheik Mohammed Ali
(Expert) 05 December 2011
yes, you can approach the court then you will get the share.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 December 2011
On the basis of facts stated by you it was ancestral property forming a coparcenary between father and his 01son and 03 daughters as you state.As your father passed away in 2008 on his death a notional partition by fiction of law shall be deemed to have taken place to decide what share your father had in this coparcenary of 10 acres which would be 1/5 and 1/5 belongs to his son and each of the daughters also have 1/5 th share.
Thus when your father has died intestate with out any will his this 1/5 th left in the coparcenary shall be inherited by his all heirs left behind in class I who would be his widow[your mother]and his 01 son and
03 daughters all getting simultaneously and
equally which counts 1/25 each.
Hence in those 10 acres your mother has a share of 0.4 acre and your brother has 2.4 acres and also each of you three have 2.4 acres of share as per Hindu succession Act,which i hope applies in Karnataka state.
That being the case Mutation registration in name of your brother alone is illegal and does not confer any exclusive right on him.
You should contest to reopen that mutation by making first a RTI to know on what basis the mutation in his exclusive name has been made by them there after getting the answer file objection in the light of right told you here.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 05 December 2011
Dear Experts,
I realy thankfull to your reply,
You are answerd my question on central act 2005, but we are living in karnataka, our family is joint family,property also joint family property, this will be basis on karnataka amendment act 1994 or Central act 2005.Please give me suggestion.
thank U
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 December 2011
The rule is that when there are two competent legislation ,one by state and the other by central,the latest shall apply[section4].
However even under Karnataka Act the same right pre existed.
The central Act has been brought to remove anomaly so that law with regard to coparcenary rights of daughters may be recognized in whole of India.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 December 2011
KARNATAKA ACT No. 23 OF 1994.
(First published in the Karnataka Gazette Extraordinary on the Thirtieth day of July,
1994)
THE HINDU SUCCESSION (KARNATAKA AMENDMENT) ACT, 1990.
(Received the assent of the President on the Twenty-eighth day of July, 1994)
An Act to amend the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in its application to the State
of Karnataka
WHEREAS the Constitution of India has proclaimed equality before law as a
fundamental right;
And whereas the exclusion of the daughter from participation in co-parcenary
ownership merely by reason of her sex is contrary thereto;
And whereas the baneful system of dowry has to be eradicated by positive measure
which will simultaneously ameliorate the condition of women in the Hindu society;
BE it enacted by the Karnataka State Legislature in the Forty-first year of the Republic
of India as follows ;
1. Short title and commencement.- (1) This Act may be called the Hindu
Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990.
(2) It shall come into force at once.
2. Insertion of new sections in Central Act XXX of 1956.- In the Hindu
Succession Act, 1956 (Central Act XXX of 1956) after section 6, the following sections
shall be inserted, namely:-
"6A. Equal rights to daughter in co-parcenary property.- Notwithstanding
anything contained in section 6 of this Act,-
(a) in a joint Hindu family governed by Mitakshara law, the daughter of a co-parcener
shall by birth become a co-parcener in her own right in the same manner as the son and
have the same rights in the co-parcenary property as she would have had if she had
been a son inclusive of the right to claim by survivorship and shall be subject to the
same liabilities and disabilities in respect thereto as the son;
(b) at a partition in such Joint Hindu Family the co-parcenary property shall be so
divided as to allot to a daughter the same share as is allotable to a son:
Provided that the share which a predeceased son or a predeceased daughter would
have got at the partition if he or she had been alive at the time of the partition, shall be
allotted to the surviving child of such predeceased son or of such predeceased daughter:
Provided further that the share allotable to the predeceased child of the predeceased
son or of a predeceased daughter, if such child had been alive at the time of the
partition, shall be allotted to the child of such predeceased child of the predeceased son
or of such predeceased daughter, as the case may be;
(c) any property to which a female Hindu becomes entitled by virtue of the
provisions of clause (a) shall be held by her with the incidents of co-parcenary
ownership and shall be regarded, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any
other law for the time being in force, as property capable of being disposed of by her by
will or other testamentary disposition; (d) nothing in clause (b) shall apply to a daughter married prior to or to a partition
which had been effected before the commencement of Hindu Succession (Karnataka
Amendment) Act, 1990.
6B. Interest to devolve by survivorship on death.- When a female Hindu dies after
the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990, having
at the time of her death an interest in a Mitakshara co-parcenary property, her interest in
the property shall devolve by survivorship upon the surviving members of the coparcenary and not in accordance with this Act:
Provided that if the deceased had left any child or child of a pre-deceased child, the
interest of the deceased in the Mitakshara co-parcenary property shall devolve by
testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by
survivorship.
Explanation.- (1) For the purposes of this section the interest of female Hindu
Mitakshara co-parcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have
been allotted to her if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before her
death, irrespective of whether she was entitled to claim partition or not.
(2) Nothing contained in the proviso to this section shall be construed as enabling a
person who, before the death of the deceased had separated himself or herself from the
co-parcenary, or any of his or her heirs to claim on intestacy a share in the interest
referred to therein.
6C. Preferential right to acquire property in certain cases.- (1) Where, after the
commencement of Hindu Succession (Karnataka Amendment) Act, 1990 an interest in
any immovable property of an intestate or in any business carried on by him or her,
whether solely or in conjunction with others devolves under sections 6A or 6B upon two
or more heirs and any one of such heirs proposes to transfer his or her interest in the
property or business, the other heirs shall have a preferential right to acquire the interest
proposed to be transferred.
(2) The consideration for which any interest in the property of the deceased may be
transferred under sub-section (1) shall, in the absence of any agreement between the
parties, be determined by the court, on application, being made to it in this behalf, and if
any person proposing to acquire the interest is not willing to acquire it for the
consideration so determined, such person shall be liable to pay all costs of or incidental
to the application.
(3) If there are two or more heirs proposing to acquire any interest under, this
section, that heir who offers the highest consideration for the transfer shall be preferred.
Explanation.- In this section 'Court' means the court within the limits of whose
jurisdiction the immoveable property is situate or the business is carried on, and includes
any other court which the State Government may by notification in the official Gazette
specify in this behalf".
* * * *
livingston_k
(Expert) 08 December 2011
you can approach the court you ur sisters and mother are having rights because it is ancestral property.
Livingston
Advocate
9841444177
