Dear Ms. Priya,
The grand father's property is an ancestral property (a co-parcenary property).
With effect from 1.1.2005, in a joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law, the daughter of a co-parcener shall by birth becomes a co-parcener in her own right in the same manner as the son and would have the samerights in the co-parcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son.
In the normal course, being daughter of a co-parcener (your father), you would have been entitled to an equal share in the ancestral property (property of your grand father) from 1.1.2005.
However, in the instant case, according to you, the partition took place amongst your brothers in the year 1993 itself (probably by that time your father and mother had died).
According to proviso to Section 6(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (as amended), "any partition that took place prior to 1.1.2005 shall not get invalidated or affected". In other words, even though a daughter of a co-parcener shall have equal right as that of a son on and from 1.1.2005, if any property in which she could have claimed a rightful share had been partitioned prior to 1.1.2005, then the daughter will not be in a position to upset the partition that had already taken place amongst the sons.
Thus, you will not be in a position to claim any share in your grand father's property, since the partition had already taken place prior to 1.1.2005 i.e. in 1993 itself.