son liability in case of father debt
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
This query is : Resolved
DearSir i want to know about liability of son in case of fatherpersonal debts, in case father dies to what extent son is liable debt is of year 2000.please tell in both cases whether debt is private or government and whether son personal asset remain liable.
And son rolein case of father debt come after only his death if there is no guarantee of son to father debt..
pls answer soon .
M.Sheik Mohammed Ali
(Expert) 01 June 2011
yes, as per civil law the son and legal heirs liable to pay if father debt from any one, so the legal heirs entitle to the father debt. only civil case.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 01 June 2011
If the debt is for the family purpose then pious obligation comes, if debt is for the bad habits of the father then son is not liable to pay it.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
sir to what extent son is liable if debt is related to business of father and that business has closed much before and son doing job only .and whether son personal asset which he had earned by his own job liable to pay.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
I WANT TO KNOW SIR TO WHAT EXTENT SIR ,IF ALL PROPERTIES OF FATHER SOLD OUT THEN WHETHER SON PERSONNAL ASSET WHICH HE EARNED BY DOING JOB LIABLE TO PAY PERSONAL DEBT WHICH IS RELATED TO HIS BUSINESS WHICH CLOSED OUT.SIR WHETHER SON HAS TO FACE CRIMINAL TRIAL.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
PLS QUOTE ANY SECTION , ACT, I AM CA
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 01 June 2011
you say debt relates to year 2000 then if there is no decree already passed,and if there is no mortgage alive securing the debt, then debt appears to have become time barred and no action of its recovery throgh suit is possible.as according to law the time to realise a debt through suit is 3years from the date it become due to be pable and if it was secured by some imovable property then time to recover it is 12 years from the date it becomes due and in case a decree has been already passed for its recovery then its execution can go within 12years from the date of decree.
The burden to discharge debt of a father is casted on son under old hindu law against which nothing has been codified so far.Mind that this obligation is on only hindu son and not on every son,so muslim son is not bound.
As regards to the extent of liability of a hindu son,you may note that if father passes leavin behind him properties as well as debt,the debt shall first be discharged from his properties,and in case some thing still remains then it has to be discharged by a HINDU son.
Hopefully the matter should now be clear to you.
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
No, If father dies after amendment in sec6 of hindu succession act i.e. 2005 no child is bound to pay debt of his father...
Plz go thru...
6 (l). Devolution of interest in coparcenaries property
(1) On and from the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, in a Joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law, the daughter of a coparcener shall,--
(a) by birth become a coparcener in her own right the same manner as the son ;
(b) have the same rights in the coparceners property as she would have had if she had been a son;
(c) be subject to the same liabilities in respect of the said coparceners property as that of a son, and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener:
Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall affect or invalidate any disposition or alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which had taken place before the 20th day of December, 2004.
(2) Any property to which a female Hindu becomes entitled by virtue of sub section (1) shall be held by her with the incidents of coparceners ownership and shall be regarded, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force in, as property capable of being disposed of by her by testamentary disposition.
(3) Where a Hindu dies after the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, his interest in the property of a Joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law, shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship, and the coparceners property shall be deemed to have been divided as if a partition had taken place and,--
(a) the daughter is allotted the same share as is allotted to a son;
(b) the share of the pre-deceased son or a pre-deceased daughter, as they would have got had they been alive at the time of partition, shall be allotted to the surviving child of such pre-deceased son or of such pre-deceased daughter; and
(c) the share of the pre-deceased child of a pre-deceased son or of a pre deceased daughter, as such child would have got had he or she been alive at the time of the partition, shall be allotted to the child of such pre-deceased child of the pre-deceased so or a pre-deceased daughter, as the case may be.
Explanation.-- For the purposes of this sub-section, the interest of a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to him if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before his death, irrespective of whether he was entitled to claim partition or not.
(4) After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, no court shall recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great grandfather solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, of such son, grandson or great-grandson to discharge any such debt:
Provided that in the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, nothing contained in this sub-section shall affect--
(a) the right of any creditor to proceed against the son, grandson or great-grandson, as the case may be; or
(b) any alienation made in respect of or in satisfaction of, any such debt, and any such right or alienation shall be enforceable under the rule of pious obligation in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable as if the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 had not been enacted.
Explanation.--For the purposes of clause (a), the expression "son", "grandson" or "great-grandson" shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson or great-grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
(5) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to a partition, which has been effected before the 20th day of December,2004
Explanation- For the purposes of this section "partition" means any partition made by execution of a deed of partition duly registered under the Registration Act, 1908 or partition effected by a decree of a court.]
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
sub section (4) After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, no court shall recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great grandfather solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, of such son, grandson or great-grandson to discharge any such debt:
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
but in proviso -------
Provided that in the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, nothing contained in this sub-section shall affect--
(a) the right of any creditor to proceed against the son, grandson or great-grandson, as the case may be; or
(b) any alienation made in respect of or in satisfaction of, any such debt, and any such right or alienation shall be enforceable under the rule of pious obligation in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable as if the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 had not been enacted.
Explanation.--For the purposes of clause (a), the expression "son", "grandson" or "great-grandson" shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson or great-grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005.
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
So, in your case debt contract was come into existance in 2000 so this section as amended does not applied...
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
son's personal estates not been liable for any debt of his father..
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 01 June 2011
.SIR WHETHER SON HAS TO FACE CRIMINAL TRIAL.
Answer:
Never! There is no criminal liability of a son against any act done by his gather.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
SIR IT MEANS DEBT CONTRACTEDAFTER 2005 NO SON LIABILITY BUT SIR AS DEBT IS CONTRACTEDIN YEAR 2000 SO PLS SIR I AM NOT CLEAR ON MY LIABILITY TO WHAT EXTENT CAN U TELL ME ANY SECTION OF ACT HAVING REFERENCE. I AM AFRAID AS I AM MARRIED WITH KIDS AND ON CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND I AM NOT ABLE TO FOCUS ON MY WORK PLS GUIDE SIR SOON .I AM AFRAID OF JAIL SIR.PLS GUIDE SIR
virendermahajan
(Querist) 01 June 2011
I AM DOING JOB IN INDUSTRY PLS MENTION ACT AND SECTIONS IN MY CASE
Ravikant Soni
(Expert) 02 June 2011
There is no criminal liability on the part of you. If you got any property from your father then the liability civil only extends to such property, not more.
RAJU O.F.,
(Expert) 02 June 2011
If you have not executed any document as co-borrower or guarantor, you do not have any liability to the debt, if your father is alive. If father is deceased, you would be liabile only for the value of share of his properties derived from fathers assets. Since you do not have any personal liability for debt created by your father, your personal properties can not be attached or proceeded with.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 02 June 2011
AS THERE IS AMENDMENT IN HINDU SUCCESSIONT ACT IN YEAR 2005 BUT THAT AMENDMENT HAS NO RETRESPECTIVE EFFECT
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 02 June 2011
If you are very much afraid of the jail, immediately meet a local advocate along with your papers available and get a legal opinion.
vinay sonpal
(Expert) 02 June 2011
Lots of opinions have poured in. The law is settled that if the son inherits estate of father or who ever is representing estate of the deceased, he is liable to that extent only. It is obligation to pay the decreetal debt out of the estate of the deceased and not out of personal assets of he legal heir.This position is very much clear from the provisions of section 50(2) of the Civil Procedure Code. The applicability or otherwise of Hindu Succession Act is irrelevant.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
HAVE U READ SIR SEC 53 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE PLS READ AND THEN GIVE OPINION PLS SIR.
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
YAH I THINK SIR IF HINDULAW DOESNOT DEFINE EXTENT OF LIABILITY OF SON THEN SEC 50 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE WILL APPLY
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
MY FATHER IS ALIVE ,LOGICALLY I THINK SIR SON IS ONLY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF FATHER THEN SEC 50 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE WILL APPLY
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
IN CASE PERSON IS ALIVE HIS SON IS ONLY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE AS IN HINDU LAW THERE IS PIOUS OBLIGATION ,BUT NOT DEFINED UNDER HINDU LAW TO USE PERSONAL ASSET OF LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE THAT IS SON IN THAT CASE SEC 50 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE WILL APPLY ONLY.I THINK SO SIR,AS HINDU LAW IS NOT CODIFIED BY GOVERNMENT YET. BUT IT DOES NOT DEFINE ABOUT WHICH AASET OF SON WILL BE USED SO SEC50 WHICH DEFINE EXTENT OF LIABILITY OF LEGALREPRESENTAIVE WILL APPLY
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
I THINK PIOUS OBLIGATION CONTINUES DURING LIFETIME OF FATHER ALSO BUT SEC50 HEADING IS LIABILITY OF LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE THEN IT WILL COVER BOTH CASES WHEN PERSON IS DECEASED OR ALIVE ,AS SON IS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE ONLY
virendermahajan
(Querist) 03 June 2011
NOW HINDU SUCCESSION ACT HAS DEFINED ON LIABILITY OF SON BUT IT APPLIES ON AND AFTER 2005 ONLY THEN IN THAT CASE SEC50 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE WILL NOT APPLY
Guest
(Expert) 07 June 2011
I endorse views of Ravikant Soni and Vinay Sonpal.
