Partition
ram
(Querist) 30 July 2015
This query is : Resolved
Dear expert
My grand father died intestate on 1955. I was born on 1959 and a Hindu. My father and his brother partitioned my grandfather's property on 1972.
Question is :
Do I have a share in my grandfather's property by birth or the partitioned property is my father's self acquired(own)property.
regards
Ram
rajagopal.s
(Expert) 30 July 2015
Hi
The share what your father got in 1972 will be treated as your father's absolute property. You may get a share out of your father's property if he does not dispose the property to some one else.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 30 July 2015
After partition of the grandfather property it is treated self acquired property and he can dispose it off as he wish.
Anirudh
(Expert) 30 July 2015
Dear Ram,
If you are correct that your grand father expired in the year 1955, then in that case, what your father got is 'Ancestral Property'. Definitely, you have 1/2 share in it.
Guest
(Expert) 30 July 2015
Well advised by Expert Mr.rajagopal.S.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 31 July 2015
yes. i am also agree with mr.aniruth. since your father's share is an ancestral property which he got after your birth, you are entitled to get your share from your father
ram
(Querist) 31 July 2015
Dear experts,
What would be the implications of section 8 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in my case.
regards
ram
Anirudh
(Expert) 02 August 2015
Sec. 8 of HSA has no application in your fact situation.
Guest
(Expert) 02 August 2015
By his latest query about implication of sec.8 it has become amply clear that Mr. Ram wants an answer to his academic query, as if law student, rather than being interested in getting share of the property from his father.
A vital question arises, why he wants a share from his father during his father's life time and what response he had got if asked his father?
Moreover, he has not mentioned how many siblings he had at the time of partition.
ram
(Querist) 02 August 2015
Dear Sh.Dhingra & other experts
Thanks a lot for all of your responses.
Let me explain in detail as desired.
1. My grandfather (Hindu), farmer by profession got some properties of my Great Grandfather on partition with his brothers and purchased some on his own during his lifetime & died in the year 1955 intestate leaving my father
(a major) and his only brother ( a minor).
2. My father, farmer by profession got married in 1956 and had no other source of income except from my Grandfather"s properties managing all properties.
3, I was born in 1959 & married.
4. I have one married brother(DoB 1961) &
one married sister (DOB 1963). Married
on 1983. We are all in TamilNadu.
5. My father & his only brother
partitioned all my Grandfather"s properties on 1972.
5. My father executed a registered will
in May,2002 for all the properties he got during partition as well as some other properties he purchased during his life time from the income of my grandfather"s partitioned property.
6. In the will, few properties were mentioned for my married sister and for myself whereas 80% to my younger brother.
Also my mother was given life interest.
7. My father died in October,2002.
8. Now my mother is managing all the properties.
9. I had raised objection and after my family elder"s interventions failed, I have filed a partition suit in 2008 & still pending.
10. During my interactions with learned legal professionals including this forum, I got conflicting views for & against my case citing different judgement orders between sections 6 & 8 of HS, 1956.
Hope things are clear now. Expecting your valved responses to clear my doubts.
regards
Ram
Guest
(Expert) 03 August 2015
Mr. Ram,
Thanks for your belated clarification when the experts had already expressed their different opinions.
But you should have known that the implications of law has to be seen with reference to the totality of the situation and dates of the events having occurred and more specifically in property cases with specific reference to the other legal heirs.
So, your original question was purely of an academic nature, as if intelligently framed by some examiner to test the deepness of knowledge of the examinees, as neither the HSA existed at the time of death of your GF, nor you existed at the time of the event of death of your GF. Coplexity of the question still compels me not to believe the issue to have been related to a real situation, being rarest of the rare. A VIAL QUESTION ARISES, was there any reason for you to keep quiet on the matter till your age of 56 years, as of now, and also at the time of death of your father in the year 2002, you were quite major and sensible of the age of 43 years to raise your finger on the property issue at that opportune time?
Nevertheless, even if it is your real problem, when you say, "during my interactions with learned legal professionals including this forum, I got conflicting views for & against my case citing different judgement orders between sections 6 & 8 of HS, 1956," that is not due to the lack of knowledge of the experts or lawyers whom you would have consulted or who replied, rather than a very brief academic query. Evidently, the difference of opinion is caused only due to lack of sharing of the most necessary information by you.
Still further, when you knew that the controversy is there due to the difference of opinions, you could well have come forward with the total information with you. But still you tried not to reveal any such information.
Anyway, if it is your real problem, even still due to the nature of complexities in your case you can get entirey different and confusing opinions from experts. TO BE FRANK, I also hold different opinion than many others. The reason for that is, due to complexity of your problem, your case needs to be examined in detail with reference to the case related documents, the registered transfer deed in favour of your GF or even forefathers, the partition deed and the will of your father vis-a-vis the related laws in force at the time of death of your grand father as well as your father.
SO, BETTER DISCUSS THE MATTER THREADBARE IN PERSON WITH SOME KNOWLEDGEABLE EXPERT BY SHOWING THE CASE RELATED DOCUMENTS. IF YOU STILL PREFER TO TAKE THE ISSUE CASUALLY, YOU WOULD GET TOTALLY CONFUSED. Rest depends upon your own wisdom.
Anirudh
(Expert) 03 August 2015
Please note prior to 1956 (i.e. prior to coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956) property inherited from the father, or father's father (grandfather) or father's father's father (great grandfather) are 'ancestral properties' in the hands of the person who receives the property.
In your case, according to you, your grandfather got some properties from his father prior to 1956 and in fact died in the year 1955 (which is clearly prior to the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956).
Therefore, I have no doubt that the property in question is ancestral in character.
As regards the operation of Section 8 of the HSA, please note that the said section will come into operation only in those cases where the first inheritence takes place after coming into being of the HSA 1956. For example, assuming that your great grandfather had self-acquired the property himself (i.e. without getting it from his father etc.) prior to 1956, but he dies after HSA 1956, then in that case as the property is being devolved to his son(s) for the FIRST TIME after 1956 it will be treated as 'INHERITENCE' and private property. That is not the situation in your case.
Therefore, the property being 'Ancestral' Section 6 of HSA will operate.
According to you, your father died in the year 2002 - and no partition took place prior to that.
Prior to that H.S. (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1990 came into force w.e.f. 25.3.1989. Your sister would have got equal share as a son in the family, if she had not been married off earlier. But your sister was married in the year 1983 itself. So she was not a co-parcener in respect of the property.
In that situation, according to Sec. 6 of the HSA the property would get partitioned notionally in the year 2002 on the death of your father.
On such notional partition, your father, and you two brothers would get equal share i.e. 1/3 each.
At best, father could have WILLed only his 1/3rd share and not other's share.
With this legal background you may have to proceed. However, the question as to when you came to know about the WILL and whether you took any legal action within limitation etc., or whether at any point of time you took advantage of the WILL and enjoyed the property as given through the WILL and therefore would not be able to protest against it etc., would be the issues that may arise, which you have to take care.
Guest
(Expert) 03 August 2015
Well Advised by Senior Expert Mr.P.S.Dhingra.
ram
(Querist) 03 August 2015
Dear Sh.Dhingra & Sh.Anirudh
I am very much enlightened by your valuable reply as you have painstakingly explained.
with warm regards
Ram
Guest
(Expert) 03 August 2015
You are welcome.
