Need views - sec 8 of hindu succession act 1956 wiping out the term ancestral property
Jaya Pathak
(Querist) 21 February 2015
This query is : Resolved
Hello Sir,
I studied the Sec 8 of Hindu Succession Act 1956 related to one of my client's case. As per this section the property which Hindu person's legal heirs get after he dies interstate it becomes personal property of the legal heirs mentioned in Class I.
Hence it means whatever property is left by a person after his death to the next generation after 1956 will never get the character of "ANCESTRAL PROPERTY".
So does it mean the concept of ANCESTRAL PROPERTY as per Hindu Law is getting indirectly wiped out due to this section 8 of HSA?
I would specifically like to mention the following:
In Mulla's Hindu Law, Twentieth Edition, VolumeI, Chapter XII - Mitakshara Law the principles of the ancient settled uncodified Hindu Law are succinctly enunciated. The principles may be enumerated thus:(i) The property inherited by a Hindu from his father, father's father or father's father's father is ancestral property (unobstructed heritage as regards his own male issue). page 357
Views from experts in this forum will be highly appreciated.
Thanks
Jaya
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 21 February 2015
section 8 deal with rules of succession of make Hindu. I could not find anything like what you have mentioned.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 21 February 2015
Section 8 of the HSA, 1956 provides general rules of succession in the case of Hindu males wherein the property of such male dying intestate shall devolve upon his legal heirs as specified in sub sections a to d therein. There is no question of the concept of ancestral property getting indirectly wiped out as wrongly understood by you. The ancestral property will remain whose meaning has been defined in various other sections, you may go through all of them properly and then come back with your query in that regard.
Jaya Pathak
(Querist) 22 February 2015
Hello Sir,
Well there is no direct reference in the Succession Act about ancestral property but I will try to put an example so I can explain what I meant to say.
Any property which is ancestral was at some point of time self acquired.
So lets consider an example where "A" has self acquired property and we consider the below two scenarios:
1) He dies before 1956, so his property devolves on the future generation and it became ancestral property. [As per Mulla's Hindu Law - The property inherited by a Hindu from his father, father's father or father's father's father is ancestral property unobstructed heritage as regards his own male issue - page 357]
2) But if he dies after 1956 then as per Succession Act it becomes personal property of the Class I heirs. So the property even though it devloves on future generation it will never become ancestral property.
I hope I have tried my best to explain what I meant in my initial post.
Thanks
Jaya
Shantilal Pandya
(Expert) 07 April 2015
the interpretation put forward by the questioner of section 8 of the Hindu Succession Actas wiping out the character of property as ancestral is misconceived, the property in the given case remains ancestral
Anirudh
(Expert) 07 April 2015
Dear Jaya,
1. Please note, that those properties which have acquired the character of ancestral property prior to 1956 (ie. before coming into force of HSA 1956) will continue as Ancestral Property with all the trappings of co-parcener etc., attached with it.
2. If any self-acquired property priorr to 1956 and which has not acquired the character of áncestral property prior to HSA 1956, will not acquire ancestral character thereafter. Therefore in regard to those properties the inheritance will apply.
3. You are correct that after coming into force of HSA 1956, any property (i.e. those property which has not already acquired the character of ancestral property) coming to the hands of a male through inheritance will be his personal property. In this regard, the first decision of the Supreme Court was in Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs Chander Sen Etc 1986 AIR 1753, 1986 SCR (3) 254
Shantilal Pandya
(Expert) 14 April 2015
As per the decision cited above by shri Anirudh the view that the concept of ancestral property getting wiped of as discussed by Jaya Pathak appears to be correct, in that view acquiring interest by birth has become redundant still however amendment of 2005 in the Hindu Succession Act recognizing acquisition of interest by birth in favor of daughters at par with son is required to be examined in the light of the SC decision cited earlier . furter I would like the experts to consider the decision by the Supreme Court in the caseSLP (C) No. 22388 of 2011)
ROHIT CHAUHAN …APPELLANT VERSUS
SURINDER SINGH & ORS which is it appears concerning revival of the character of property as being of ancestral nature on birth of a son in the family
Thanks .
