Property rights of tn women married before 1989 on brothers 33 years ownership

If the property was partitioned among themselves by the sons and one daughter alone, without giving any share to the other daughters, especially if the subsisting Will was not enforced, then it is an injusitce done to the remaining daughters.

These  left out daughters are entitled to a share equally at par with their other siblings as per the HSA, 1956.

The question is not about who signed as witness to the partition or settlement deed 33 years ago, but rhe question is about the not giving  an equal share to the left out daughters out of their father's properties.

There is no limit to file a partitioon suit, hence the left out daughters can file a suit for partition claiming their respective and legitimate share in the properties with separate possesion divided by metes and bounds and if the left out daughters are not alive then their legal heirs/successors in interest can very well claim a share out of their mothers' share in the properties left behind by their grandfather.

The partition suit is not barred by limitation act.

The property being not ancestral, the 1989 amendment is of no consequence,

Admittedly, the property that the father had been partitioned as if it was intestate. As such, all the siblings are entitled for equla share. And this could be enforced at any time through a partition suit.

You have stated " My Grandfather acquired a property near great grandfather property on 1968 & 69 " what do you intend to convey is not clear.

Neither status of property i.e., whether it is self-acquired ot ancestral and under any will or intestate nor  successors is clear for forming proper opinion and oblige.

It is better to consult a local prudent lawyer with relevant records.