Sale of property

He can sell.

No remedy to wife and daughter provided he maintains them adequately.

If he doesn't maintain them or poorly maintains them and if he doesn't have ancestral properties, the Sale Deed can be challenged.

Yes.     The buyers will suffer.

A person (the father in this case) who is owner of his self-acquired property, can sell his property to anyone - including to his own son.

Therefore, either during his life time or after his death, the said sale deed cannot at all be challenged.

I completely endorse the views of Mr. Kishor Mehta. 

The wife and daughter in this present case have NO REMEDY whatsoever.

Even if one  prefer to donate it to Vatican, legal heirs have no remedy on self acquired property of any individual.

Who will, then, maintain his wife and children?

I may be wrong but would like to bring Sec 22 (2) and Sec 28 of The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 to the notice of Shri R. Ramachandran and Shri G. L. N. Prasad.

@TKG Reddy:

Section 22 (2) of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 Act says "Where a dependant has not obtained, by testamentary or intestate succession, any share in the estate of a Hindu dying after the commencement of this Act, the dependant shall be entitled, subject to the provisions of this Act, to maintenance from those who take the estate."

In the above fact situation, once the hindu has sold off his property during his life time, which dependent obtained by testamentary or intestate succession any share in the property of the deceased Hindu?

When no dependent has got anything, the application of Section 22(2) of HAMA, 1956 does not arise.

Similarly, Section 28 says "Where a dependant has a right to receive maintenance out of an estate, and such estate or any part thereof is transferred, the right to receive maintenance may be enforced against the transferee if the transferee has notice of the right or if the transfer is gratuitous; but not against the transferee for consideration and without notice of the right."

This Section to apply, first there ought to have been some estate of the deceased after his demise.  That is not the situation here. Therefore, this Section also does not come into play.

Sec 28.

The dependants have a right to maintenance.       Out of the estate.

Right to receive maintenance may be enforced against the transferee.

After demise, can any one transfer?

The transferee came into existence before demise.

Sec 22 (2)

Dependant ( not, however, defendant ) hasn't got anything in this case.     Entitled to, therefore, maintenance from those who bought the estate.

@TGK Reddy:  In spite of explaining, it seems you are hell bent in sticking to your stand.  I leave it to your wisdom.

Right sir.

@TGK Reddy: 

Assume for a while that during my life time, I sell my only property to you.

According to Sec. 22(2), and 28, do you mean to say that after my demise, you (being a transferee) are liable to provide maintenance to my dependents (wife, sons and daughters), because the Transferee came into existence before my demise?

Shri R. Ramachandran

Dear Sir

Yes.    I, in fact, mean so, sir.

Sir.    I may be foolish.    Let other members and experts benefit from my foolishness.

It's not my way to vex the learned members.    Your criticism improves my knowledge, sir.      Most of the members are Advocates and it's my duty to respect Advocates.     You're quite learned.

Whenever a man ( or woman ) chooses to sell his property, the buyer should ensure that the property has no liabilities.     A man may have sons and daughters that are minors.    The buyer should take no objection from the Court of Law.     Even if a son or daughter is in the womb, Court has to give no objection.     The Seller has no absolute powers to dispose of his property.     If the sons and daughters cross the age of minority, responsibility of maintenance ceases and there's no need of Court's permission.  But wife still remains.     The major sons and daughters have to sign the Sale Deed if it's ancestral property.     If the wife signs the Sale Deed, she too loses the right of maintenance from the buyer.

This's what I interpreted from the Act.

Pardon me if I am wrong.

With respect

Yours faithfully

TGK REDDI 

I am sorry, I am not able to agree with you.  Whatever that you have said is not the correct legal position.