Ancestral property rights

Dear Maggie, 

1. If the second marriage was otherwise ceremoniously complete and void only for the reason that man was already married though it is a void marriage, but the children are deemed to be legitimate for the purposes of their parents. (S.16 HMA)

2. Now the question of share in ancestral property - in the name of grand father - when the grandfather dies - by way of inheritance such property goes to his legal heirs - including the father - in whose share the child can ask seek partition. 

There's a specific decision on this point : Revansidappa & Anr. v. Mallikarjun & Ors. 2011 March. SC 

dear Maggie 

please lt me know the religion of the parties invloved. Assuming that they ar hindus, i try answer ur query. the children born out of II marriage ar entitld to share out  of the property of their parents including ancestral property[ . there ar few decisons rendrd by karnakata high court.

In a historically  ruling, the  Supreme Court upheld the right of illegitimate children to the father’s share in ancestral property.  The ruling dissented from  the earlier position held  in Jinia Keotin  v. Kumar Sitaram Manjhi, (2003) 1 SCC 730 and Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan,  AIR 2010 SC 2685 which had constrained the rights of illegitimate children to the separate  property of the father and had held that a child born in a void or voidable marriage was not entitled to claim rights in ancestral  property.

While referring the issue to a larger bench in the context of the contradictory positions between the earlier rulings and the present one,  the Court held: ““The Court cannot interpret a socially beneficial legislation on the basis as if the words therein are cast in stone. Such legislation must be given a purposive interpretation to further and not to frustrate the eminently desirable social purpose of removing the stigma on such children.”

The Court relied upon Article 39 (f) of the Constitution which mandates that all children must be given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth must be protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.

The Supreme Court in Revanasiddappa & Anr. vs Mallikarjun & Ors.  pronounced on 31 March, 2011 deviatied from the earlier decisions of SC in Jinia Keotin , Neelamma  and Bharatha Matha and held that children born out of void and voidable marriage are not only entitled to self-acquired property but also to the ancestral property, by referring the issue to a larger bench.

good evening sir, my grandfather,s property is been mutated to his three son they have partitioned in the year 82-82. on that my aunt was minnor. now she wants claim from that property. my father died and i have mutated the part of land to my name. does she gets any claim from said or from his brothers those who are live now.?please provide suitable way to proceed.