Succession of a hindu male dying intestate

Father is entitled to share. but shares will be determined on the basis of Hindu succession Act and not on the basis of succession certificate.

kindly clarify  your words " legal heirship certificate issued by revenue authorities" and further let me know the State in which property is situated.

Father is entitled get share under The Hindusuccession Act and comes under class 2 schedule.

SEC 8 General rules of succession in the case of Males:

a) firstly, upon the heirs, being th relatives specified in class I of the schedule

b) secondly, if there is no heir of class I then upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class II of the schedule.

c) thridly, if there is no heir of any of the two classes then upon the agnates of the deceased: &

d) lastly, if there is no agnate, then upon the cognates of the deceased.

____

Class I legal heirs.Son, dauhter, widow, mother, son of a predecased son: daughter of predecased son: son of a predecased daughter: daughter of predeceased daughter: widow of the apredecased son: son of a predeceased son of a predeceaseed son: daughter of a predeceased son of a predeceasd son: widow of a predeceasd son of a predecased son.

class : II )   1) father,

Father comes under class II legal heir.  As such he is entittle for the share in the properties of deceased son.

Father is not entitled to a share in the present case, as he is only a Class II heir. Only if Class I heirs are not available, then the property would devolve upon Class II heirs. 

See Section 8 again :

SEC 8 General rules of succession in the case of Males:

 

a) firstly, upon the heirs, being th relatives specified in class I of the schedule

 

b) secondly, if there is no heir of class I then upon the heirs, being the relatives specified in class II of the schedule.....

 

 I agree with Shri  Y Praksh Ji

Father is II Class heir and he is entiled to sucession when there are no I clas heris , in the this   case there are I Class heris , therefore father is not entitled to share the proerty

Correction- mr. y prakash is right. father is not entitled to a share . in my reply, due to inadvertence , the word "not" was skipped to be scribed before the word "father" . i am sorry.

Note: if property is covered tenancy laws viz. if it is agricultural land, the local Act of concerned state is to be seen.

i agree with y prakash's view that father is not entitled for share as he is 2nd class heir. as per hindu sucession act only after the ist class heir if they are not living only then 2nd class heir are entitled for this.

All our learned friends are stated rightly.

Mr. Prakash  is right. the father- being an heir in Class II - will not be entitled to inherit any property from his son. in addition, the heirship certificate needs correction, for it is not in accordance with the legal provisions. The father should not be shown as an heir when relatives in Class I are present.  As a general rule, the heirship certificate should never show heirs of different Classes (Class I, II,III,IV) as heirs together  because the rule is that if Class I heirs are not alive, then the ClassII heirs inherit; likewise if Class II heirs are not alive, the Class III heirs inherit and so on.

Dr. Veena Madhav Tonapi, B.Sc(Hons); LL.M.; P.HD(Law), Principal, J.S.S.Sakri LAw College, Heggeri, Hubli 580024