Regarding ancestral property/self acquired property
suresh babu
(Querist) 18 September 2014
This query is : Resolved
Sir, I have a doubt, please clarify that under mitakshara hindu law the property inherited by a hindu from his father, fathers father, or fathers fathers father is ancestral property to his son or daughter. whereas property inherited from other relations i.e from his brotheror uncle etc. is the seperate property.And also kindly refer to the supreme court judgement dated 15/07/2013 in a civil appeal no. 5475 of 2013 between rohit chauhan v/s surinder singh & ors.
clarify whether the HSA is applicable through out india or differ from state to state. I am from bangalore.And also there is a judgment from Delhi cort between Brij narain Aggarwal vs Anup kumar goyal & ors, ruling that the very first condition of the application of this amended provision is that on the day when amended act came into force, an HUF governed by mitakshara law must be in existance. if joint family is in existence on that day, the daughter shall be a coparcener as that of a son.
The above mentioned clarification is required for my query dated 3/9/14 with the experts reply from mr. Anirudh. mr. laxmikant koshi, mr. Kumar doab, mr. Dr.j.c vashista & mr. kalai selvan. Please dont mistake my query.I am little bit confused.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 27 September 2014
The HSA is applicable through out India, in some states where the rule of equal shares for daughters have come into force even before the amendment to central act, i.e., in Tamilnadu, the amended act came into force in the year 1989, whereas the central act came into force in the year 2005, so in such states, if the events are prior to the central amendment, the previous one will prevail.
