Shared household

Subject ownership of the house building - home, it can be decided the rights of parents and children.  If the property was purchased by father, nobody has the legal right  to sell it other than father.  If hereditory, (owned from generations) children can claim their share.  Shared household meand everybody has equal right on each article in the property.  However, this case is different.  If children instists, any father or mother would be flexible for that as a amatter of sentimental.   However, if father has a strong attitude, there is nothing to worry.  Legally, children can not do anything but the illegal side should be afraid of.   However, keep reports with the local Police Station and/or Lawyers on the day-to-day behaviour of the children and give the shares.  Most probably, the quarrels are born between the sister-in-laws of both sons.  Certain cases the power and influence of manhood can overcome such situations.

VK,

The sons cannot neglect the old parents and force to sell the house.  They are protected by the Senior Citizens Act 2007 for the protection of life and property, as well as the maintenance and basic needs of Senior Citizens. In the above cases, the parents can ask for the cook at home and a servent for household work, the maintenance for which should be given by their childrens, especially their sons. If they fall ill, then the medical as well as the hospitalization costs should also be borune by the sons.

No act or statute could bring love or protection by itself for the needy parents.Unless the sons and daughters take care of their parents, no force can do this.Parents will not prefer to force the son or daughter through statute for taking care.In fact it is the fate of aged parents nowadays due to the change of environment . Of course these situations force the parents to take asyluim in the oldage homes and donate the properties to the orphanages,which is imminent.

Your obseration is correct ,but there has to be some way for the aged parents to bring around the erring "legal heirs",and see that they are provided with minimum basic facilities to live peacefully in their own house.Are there any voluntary NGOs doing this type of work,to provide legal asssistance or conunel the heirs,or the parents?.In this case it is only a matter of some adjustment.Otherwie the relation between the members of the family are cordial.

Mr. Mehta sees the Law without looking the background.  The question of whetehr father has given anything earlier to children (other than food) and whether children are having income to look after the family and such series of questions would arise while issuing Judgement.  It seems the natural problem of a middle-class family where unemployed brothers who wants to do business by huge investment and huge income within a short while. .

The question in this case,is whether the son/s alone are resposible or their other family members  should also"share" household resposibility--in the light of the Senior Citizens Act.For example ,in this case sons say that the sisters who are also legal heirs for this ancestral property,must also share the responsibility of looking after the parents,for some months in the year.Does that mean,sisters should take away the parents to their own houses or whether they should come and stay with the oarents for some time.

Family or human values are clear that all of them should take care,but what is the legal position in such circumstances?It is a joint family on paper.

First responsibility goes to the Son/s where paternal right is applicable.   But maternal right, is different.  However,  the constitution implies upon the male children with or without involvement of the in-laws.   The interest where to stay belongs to the parents and their likings in respect of property. Neither daughters nor sons need to take away, nor come and stay with them.

In maternal cases, Uncles and nephews were responsible by generations.   Property was under possession of the girl-children and male children were getting one share among all the number of members.   Paternal was contrary, girl-children, after marriage, had no right and during marriage all rights were disposed off to her.  However, the present Law belongs to equal right for sons and daughters (without any right toin-laws).  Once the share was given specifying that it is the share, it would be over.

In the above case, as long as parents are alive and without 3rd party involvement, 1st preference is for the interest of the parents, especially when they become senior citizens.