LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Succession intestate - male unmarried - 1998

Hi All,

This is my first question in this forum, so in case you feel I have not followed any forum rule, I deeply apologies for it.

I wanted to clarify certain understanding

 

1. Hindu Succession is Governed by Hindu Succession Act 1956 and 2005 Amendment.

2. If a Hindu Male dies Intestate then the Property is dissolved among the heirs specified in the Class I and in case there are no heir’s in Class I then upon the heirs specified in Class II.

3. If the property is dissolved among the Heirs in Class II then order of succession is the order specified in Class II.

(Please note, there were two contradictory list of heirs I noted as specified in Class II)

 

Source 1(https://punjabrevenue.nic.in/hsuccact%281%29.htm)

CLASS II

I.         Father

II         (1) Son's daughter's son, (2) son's daughter's daughter,(3)  brother, (4) sister.

III        (1) Daughter's son's son (2) daughter's son's daughter, (3) daughter's daughter's son (4) daughter's daughter's daughter.

IV.       (1) Brother's son (2) sister's son, (3) brother's daughter, (4) sister's daughter.

V.        Father's father; father's mother.

VI.       Father's widow; brother's widow.

VII.     Father's brother; fathers' sister.

VIII.    Mother's father; mother's mother.

 IX.      Mother's brother, mother's sister.

 

Source 2(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Succession_Act,_1956).

  1. Father
  2. Son's daughter's son
  3. Son's daughter's daughter
  4. Brother
  5. Sister
  6. Daughter's son's son
  7. Daughter's son's daughter
  8. Daughter's daughter's son
  9. Daughter's daughter's daughter
  10. Brother's son
  11. Sister's son
  12. Brother's daughter

 

Questions:

1. In case an unmarried Male (decreased parents) dies Intestate on 1998 (before the 2005 amendment) but the property partition is done after 13 Years (2011), whether Brother's and Sister's of the decreased would have equal share in the inherited property.

2. Please also give me some reliable reference.

3. If possible please also give reference to a similar partition judicial case.

 

Thank you again.



Learning

 16 Replies

BHANU RASPUTRA (ADVOCATE & SOLICITOR divyatta.r@gmail.com)     07 November 2011

in case of unmarried  person , his share of proeprty goes as per CLASS I  nad if no hiers as per class -I , then as per class II

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Hi Bhanu, Can you please have a closer look into my question. I am aware of the order of succession, but there were few confusions I wanted to sort out.

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Hi Bhanu,

Restating my questions

Questions:

1. In case an unmarried Male (decreased parents) dies Intestate on 1998 (before the 2005 amendment) but the property partition is done after 13 Years (2011), whether Brother's and Sister's of the decreased would have equal share in the inherited property.

2. Please also give me some reliable reference.

3. If possible please also give reference to a similar partition judicial case.

BHANU RASPUTRA (ADVOCATE & SOLICITOR divyatta.r@gmail.com)     07 November 2011

 

even partition done on 2011 , but unmarried person has his undivided share in 1998.

2005 amendment speaks about partition done after 2005 , therefore married sister has share on unmarried brother,

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     07 November 2011

unmarried male died his share will go to his legal heirs i.e., class I heirs

Bharatkumar (ADVOCATE )     07 November 2011

Bhanuji is right. Partition at 2011.

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     07 November 2011

unmarried male died his share will go to his legal heirs i.e., class I heirs

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     07 November 2011

unmarried male died his share will go to his legal heirs i.e., class I heirs

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Hi Bhanu,

Thanks for your reply.

In this regard can you please explain Section 9 of Hindu Succession Act 1956. Also I was going through Hindu Succession(Ammendment) Act 2005 and cannot find any specifc changes in Section 9 of HSA 1956.

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Just to Quote HSA 1956 Section 9.

9. Order of succession among heirs in the Schedule.


     9.Order of succession among heirs in the Schedule. Among the heirs specified in the Schedule, those in class I shall take simultaneously and to the exclusion of all other heirs ; those in the first entry in class II shall be preferred to those in the second entry ; those in the second entry shall be preferred to those in the third entry ; and so on in succession.

 

I have highlighted the portion that is confusing me,

kumar t v s (advocate)     07 November 2011

Abhijit,

what is your confussion, and what partition you are talking about.

 

you have got the provision right- i.e. in case of a hindu male dies intestate his share will devolve as per schedule I and in absence of schedule I heirs only than Schedule II.

 

In schedule II heirs in the first order are given in exclusion to the others.

 

where is the question of partition or anychanges by 2005 amendment. 

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Hi Kumar, My confusion was in aligning Bhanu's Reply

"even partition done on 2011 , but unmarried person has his undivided share in 1998. 2005 amendment speaks about partition done after 2005 , therefore married sister has share on unmarried brother, "

with the above highlighted portion of Section 9 Chapter II of HSA 1956, with respect to my original Question

1. In case an unmarried Male (decreased parents) dies Intestate on 1998 (before the 2005 amendment) but the property partition is done after 13 Years (2011), whether Brother's and Sister's of the decreased would have equal share in the inherited property.
2. Please also give me some reliable reference.
3. If possible please also give reference to a similar partition judicial case.

 

So my interpretation was, in absence of any Class I hier, the property of an unmarried Male (Decreased Parent's) would only be inherited by his other Brother's and his sister's would not have any share on his property. But Bhanu's Reply was completly in contradiction to my understanding. So was the confusion. My confusion was amplified by the fact that the same conclusion was drawn by two seperate lawyers whom I approached seperately.

Can you help me to elaborate on  this.

Abhijit (Project Lead)     07 November 2011

Hi Kumar, So what I simply want to know If my following understanding is correct ot not

In absence of any Class I hier, the property of an unmarried Male (Decreased Parent's) would only be inherited by his other Brother's and his sister's would not have any share on his property.

kumar t v s (advocate)     07 November 2011

2005 amendment is related only to ancestral property.

In your case in the absence of class I heirs, your case falls under 2nd entry of class heirs i.e.

 

II         (1) Son's daughter's son, (2) son's daughter's daughter,(3)  brother, (4) sister.

 

your sisters will have share equal to yours.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register