Property rights for daughter in a hindu marriage

BEFORE 2005

Now before 2005 only son, son’s son, son’s son’s son were coparcenors, with the daughters only having a right to reside in the property and get their marriage expenses defrayed out of the same. A son would acquire proportionate ownership in the property moment of it’s conception, but not the girls.

POST 2005

Post 2005 – now a daughter also would acquire ownership rights on the property from the time of her conception (provided ofcourse she is born alive). She has the same rights of partition and power to deal with the property as she pleases, this right extends to seeking a partition and sale of the family home as well. Hence there is a complete parity in terms of rights.  However it would be profitable to remind ourselves that these rights extend to only ancestral properties (or joint family properties – are properties which people inherit from their paternal ancestors/property through into common hotch potch/property acquired by joint family efforts/accretions etc) and not separate properties (which include property earned by gift/will/acquired through purchase from own funds/acquisitions from own skill etc.)

But there is a rider – The right to get your equivalent share of the property can be exercised only in cases where there has been no formal partition (partition either through court final decree or through a registered partition deed) before 20.12.2004. In case a partition has already been finalised before the said date, the right collapses

As you said that half of the property was from his father and which was not considered as acquired property in the hands of his son then father was entitled to bequeath Will only his self acquired property in favour of his sons,i.e.A&B. X,Y&Z are entitled to get one share in their father's ancestral property by virtue their birth.

Thanking you, 

There is no mention of acquisition o ancestral property by the father of all A to Z hence it can be presumed that the father inherited his share of property from his father's property which do not fall under the nature of ancestral property.  Therefore the father was the absolute owner of entire property and he had full rights to dispose the entire properties as per his own desire, thus, the properties bequeathed by him equally on his two sons is very much valid in law and challenging it on the a different lien is a futile exercise.

Mr. rao, I have nothing to express more My Learned Advocates have already & well defined.

Sir,

X, Y, Z will claim the share of their father's property only.