father and his brother partitioned the ancestrol property in India during the year 1959.In dthe partition deed the minor son was also added as party.A daughter was born afterwards.Father died in the year 1980. Daughter married after 1988. Son claims half of the share of his father and declare that the daughter is eligible for her share only in the balance of the property along with him..kindly offer your views.
2007-10-25 05:30:49 · 4 answers · asked by selvaraj s 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
In your last question I told the legal position. Here the ancestral property was partition in 1959 & the father got his portion of this property that became his own self acquired property. Now in this case if his share also included the share of his minor son then that son's portion goes to the son & rest of the property which belonged to father gets partitioned between the surviving class 1 heir according to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Here even the married daughter gets her portion from this father's property only. As you state the son claims half of the share out of the complete property is actually his share which his father was holding on his behalf from the time of partition of the ancestral property when he was a minor in 1959. The son offers to share the rest of the property that actually belongs to father with his sister is correct way of partition & it will hold well legally.
2007-10-25 17:03:11 · answer #1 · answered by vijay m Indian Lawyer 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
all children or legal heirs have an equal right. now there is no difference between a son or daughter. equal portion of property has to go the daughter also.
2007-10-25 15:32:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Current laws says yes. but the property in question is before the law came in to existence. so NO.
2007-10-25 05:48:11 · answer #3 · answered by harish555 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, certainly.
2007-10-25 06:11:43 · answer #4 · answered by champabhilai 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋