S RAVICHANDRAN 26 June 2017

Hsa 2005

SIRS,

MY MOTHER HAD TWO SISTERS AND FOUR BROTHERS. AT THE TIME OF PARTITION OF THE ANCESTRAL PROPERTY, THE FOUR BROTHERS ILLEGALY SHARED THE PROPERTY WITHOUT GIVING SHARE TO MY MOTHER DURING THE YEAR 1985. THE PROPERTY WAS BOTH MY MOTHER'S GRAND FATHER AND FATHER. THE PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY MY GRAND FATHER BY WAY OF PARTITION WITH HIS BROTHER. ONLY MY MOTHER HAD FILED SUIT AGAINST THE PARTITION. THE SUIT WAS PENDING IN CHENNAI HIGH COURT. THE OTHER TWO SISTERS NOT FILED THE SUIT. HENCE I REQUEST YOU TO KINDLY ADVISE ME THE HINDU SUCCESSION ACT 2005 AMENDMENT APPLICABLE FOR OUR CASE. THE SUIT INITIALLY FILED IN THE YEAR 1985 IN DISTRICT COURT. THE DISTRICT COURT ALLOTED 1/35 SHARE TO MY MOTHER. AFTER THAT WE HAVE FILED APPEAL CLAIMING EQUAL RIGHT IN CHENNAI HIGH COURT IN THE YEAR 2003. THE CASE IS STILL PENDING. PLEASE LET ME KNOW THE AMENDMENT OF HINDU SUCCESSION ACT 2005 IS APPLICABLE FOR THIS CASE. PLEASE REFER CASE LAW IF ANY.

REGARDS ON BEHALF OF MY MOTHER S. RAVICHANDRAN

Reply Follow

7 Replies

Arjun Kohli 26 June 2017

The Amendment of 2005 will certainly be not applicable for the case, as from what I can understand from the facts is that the partition took place in 1985. However, various states made certain amendments to their own areas and I shall revert once I find out more about the scenario in Tamil Nadu.

Raveena Kataria (Advocate ) 26 June 2017

Originally posted by : Arjun Kohli
	However, various states made certain amendments to their own areas and I shall revert once I find out more about the scenario in Tamil Nadu.

The amendment in Tamil Nadu was introduced in 1989 (that daughters would be entitled to a share on partition.) However, as you said, the amendment lacks retrospective effect. So currently there'd be no such relief which she's entitled to.

Ms.Usha Kapoor (CEO) 27 June 2017

Since your grandmother's ancestral property had been already partitioned way back in 1986 and although Tamilnadu passed HSA amendment Act givuing equal rights in ancestral property to daughters in 1989 much prior to HSA Amendment act 2005 2nd partition cannot happen as both the amendmends lack retrospective affect. Strictly speaking your mother lost her legal rights to a share in ancestral property way back in 1985 after partition of property once.subsequent amendments to HSA either by Tamil Nadu or HSA amendment Act 2005 giving equal rights property to daughters cant come to her rescue in view of the above reasons cited by me.

Dr J C Vashista (Advocate) 27 June 2017

Well advised by experts within the scope of information provided by you. However, consult/discuss with your lawyer who is well (better) equipped/acquinted with the facts of the case, able and intelligent to guide and sail you properly.

S RAVICHANDRAN 28 June 2017

SIRS,

AS PER THE LOWER COURT JUDGEMENTS THE PARTITION WAS ILLEGAL NOT VALID BECUASE THEY HAVE NOT MENTION OUR MOTHER NAME ANY WHERE IN THE PARTITION DEED. ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY SHARE TO MY MOTHER. THE FOUR BROTHERS ONLY PARTITIONED ALL THE FAMILY PROPERTIES WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE WOMEN SHARE. IN THIS SITUATION HOW THE PARTITION DEED IS VALID. WITHOUT GIVEN SHARE TO THE WOMEN. THEY ARE PARTIONED THE PROPERTIES WITHOUT THINKING THE LAW AND NATURAL JUSTICE.

PLEASE GIVE YOUR VALUABLE FEEDBACK.

REGARDS

S. RAVICHANDRAN

S RAVICHANDRAN 28 June 2017

SIRS

THE LOWER COURT ALLOTED 1/35 SHARE IN THE SUIT PROPERTIES. WE CLAIM EQUAL RIGHT IN THE SUIT PROPERTIES DURING THE YEAR 2003 BEFORE THE HSA 2005 AMENDMENT.

PLEASE LET ME KNOW THE HSA 2005 AMENDMENT APPLICABLE THIS CASE.

REGARDS

S. RAVICHANDRAN