Coparcener
murthy
(Querist) 03 April 2014
This query is : Resolved
My client's grand father(father's father) purchased purchased house property in the year 1942. After death of my client's grand father and grand mother in the year 1975, my client's father enjoyed the property and died intestate in September,2012. My client (married women) born on 13-06-1958. Kindly clarify whether my client is co-parcener under Hindu succession Act, 1956 as amended in September, 2005.
R.V.RAO
(Expert) 04 April 2014
the property if ancestral will certainly give female legal heirs also the same property rights as their male counterparts, as per the Hindu succession Amendment act 2005.
A property to be ancestral should have passed from last 3 generations and then landed in the hands of the 4th or present generation.ie.. great grand father to grand father to father to son.
as your client does not represent 4 th generation,it is not ancestral property and she is not a claimant to ancestral property.
but if her father had claimed partition of the ancestral property,then it is his self acquired property and since he is deceased intestate,the daughter being a class 1 legal heir, she could have claimed her share of intestate property .
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 04 April 2014
Yes, she has a share in the property
murthy
(Querist) 04 April 2014
My client's grand father(father's father) purchased house property in the year 1942. After death of my client's grand father and grand mother intestate in the year 1975, my client's father enjoyed the property and transferred the above property to grand son(i.e. son's son) by gift deed in 2010 without consent of my client. My client's father died in September, 2012. My client (married women) born in June,1958. Kindly clarify whether my client is co-parcener and having right in the ancestral property under Hindu succession Act, 1956 as amended in September, 2005.
murthy
(Querist) 04 April 2014
My client's grand father(father's father) purchased house property in the year 1942. After death of my client's grand father and grand mother intestate in the year 1975, my client's father enjoyed the property and transferred the above property to grand son(i.e. son's son) by gift deed in 2010 without consent of my client. My client's father died in September, 2012. My client (married women) born in June,1958. Kindly clarify whether my client is co-parcener and having right in the ancestral property under Hindu succession Act, 1956 as amended in September, 2005.
Anirudh
(Expert) 04 April 2014
Dear Mr. Murthy,
As the property was purchased by the grand father of your client in the year 1942 and the said grand father died only after the coming into force of the HSA 1956, it had not acquired the character of 'ancestral property' and therefore it is a separate property when it was inherited by the father of your client in the year 1975.
Being a separate property in his hands the father of your client has every right to deal with the property in the whichever way that he wants, without any need to get any consent/concurrence from any body.
Your client has no right in the property.
The Amendment to the HSA in September 2005 has no application to the case at hand.
Guest
(Expert) 04 April 2014
Since your client's father had died intestate your client has got a share in her father's property irrelevant to whether the property is self acquired or ancestral First obtain the Legal Heir Certificate which has your client name and go ahead with the steps
Guest
(Expert) 05 April 2014
You had stated your client's father had died intestate in your first query and had changed the stand in recent reply that the property had been already gifted by your client's father.Still since your client is already major at the time of gift deed execution ,the property being ancestral she has the Share and Right in the same File a Suit with ample proof it is ancestral
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 05 April 2014
In this case your client's father acquired his father's intestate property, has become an absolute owner of the property so inherited because he said property was purchased by his father and not an ancestral property. Subsequently, your client's father transferred the property vide a gift deed in favor of his grandson which is a valid transaction and for this your client's being an absolute owner of the inherited property, does not require to obtain consent from anyone to dispose the same in the manner he chose to, therefore your client's claim for a share is not legally valid and since she is not a coparcener in this property, her claim for a share in the property is not maintainable.
R.V.RAO
(Expert) 05 April 2014
Thanks.sri anirudh ji and thiru kalaiselvan ji.
Anirudh
(Expert) 06 April 2014
For this query, there are two set of answers - one saying that the client is not entitled to any share and the other saying that the client has a right for a share in the property.
Both cannot be right at the same time.
Those who said that the client has no right for any share in the property has some legal basis to say so.
Is there any legal basis for those who say that the client has a right in the property?
That is what many a times I point out in this Forum. People who do not like such an approach brand me. I am least bothered. So long as I am doing my job. Let me again say, whenever I find myself to have made an error (either in noting the facts correctly, or in overlooking a certain legal point) promptly I have corrected myself. That seldom happens in the case of others.
People who say that they watch me and make analysis can do this exercise also and find out my track record.
R.V.RAO
(Expert) 07 April 2014
yes. it is an honest request from our professional colleague.
sri Anirudh ji deserves a reply for his straight forward and righteous approach.
it not only serves as a reply but it would enlighten all members about the logic and reasoning behind our answers,i think we experts owe it to the many hapless ,needy and poor but thirsty querists,who solicit a helping hand here. Also it is a continuing education and knowledge enlightenment.
