In the case of self-acquired property of a father or mother, their son or daughter has no birth rights. Unlike ancestral property, a father has the right, in his sole discretion, to give the property or will to whomever he wishes, and the daughter or son will not have the right to protest. According to Hindu law, children can only claim a share of the father`s ancestral property and not self-acquired property. However, if, after the death of the father, he has made a will that transfers the property or a part of it to one of his sons or daughters, others cannot contest this transfer, because this was done at his discretion with regard to the property self-acquired by the father. While ancestral property is divided between Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists under the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act 1956, the rules in this regard are governed by the Indian Succession Act 1925. In the case of Muslims, the provisions of the Muslim Personal Law Enforcement (Shariat) Act 1937 apply. In Hindu law, property has been classified under the following headings: Under the Inheritance of Property Act, i.e.dem Hindu Inheritance Act, a son and a daughter are entitled to ancestral property by birth. A father cannot dispose of this property by excluding his legitimate legal heirs. A father may not, at his sole discretion, transfer/sell or give this property to third parties. In other words, it cannot deprive a daughter or son of their share of ancestral property. Children have the right to inherit such property themselves at the time of their birth. In some situations, where a father has transferred such property on behalf of a third party, the children reserve the right to object.
Under Hindu law, when a Hindu man dies without a will, his property is transferred to his rightful Class I heirs, who are the mother, widow, son, daughter, etc. A father (current owner of the ancestral property) and his son have equal property rights to the property. However, the share of each generation (the father and his siblings) is determined first, according to which the following generations must share the share inherited from their corresponding predecessor. Recommended Reading: Negative Property and its Legal Requirements to Claim Property in India The lawsuit was brought by a son for division in Devas, Madhya Pradesh, against his father and his father`s three brothers. He claimed a 1/8 share of the lawsuit property on the grounds that the lawsuit property was ancestral property and that, as Koparzener, he had a birthright to that property in accordance with the Mitakshara Act. Sc decided that, at the time of the applicant`s birth in 1977, that ancestral property, which was not common family property, could not be accepted. Property inherited by a Hindu from his father, his father`s father or the father of his father`s father is the property of his ancestors. When an intestate Hindu woman dies, the property passes as follows: therefore, if a HUF property exists due to its such creation, being thrown by a person into the common hodgepodge of self-acquired property, therefore, in the case of copals, etc., there is a claim of a share of this HUF property. In the case of property inherited from the maternal grandfather, it is considered separate property rather than ancestral property. This was confirmed in the decisions of Md. Hussain v.
Kisheva (1937) and Maktul v. Manbhari (1958). The part assigned to a coparzenor on the partition loses the status of ancestral property and becomes a separate property. Property inherited from female ancestors should also be treated as independent property. According to traditional laws, a divorced Hindu woman can claim her ex-husband`s property, provided she has not remarried after the divorce. This was mentioned in section 24 of the Hindu Succession Act 1956. However, due to the 2005 amendment, section 24 was deleted, and now, even if a widow remarries, she can still assert her right to her ex-husband`s property. In the case of classified ancestral properties that have remained undivided, four generations of male ancestry have their claim. This means that on Ram`s ancestral property, his son Shyam, Shyam`s son, Ghanshyam, and Ghanshyam`s son, Radhe Shyam, have inheritance rights. In other words, the father, grandfather, great-grandfather and great-great-grandfather have inheritance rights to undivided ancestral property.
Under the Amendment of the Hindu Inheritance Act 2005, daughters and sons have the same right to inherit their father`s property, provided that no division has been affected before the date of 20.12.2004, i.e.dem date on which this amending Act was introduced in Parliament. “If the father-in-law is in possession of the property, the son-in-law cannot rely on the fact that he was adopted as a member of the family after marrying his daughter and that he is entitled to property. The son-in-law`s stay is permissive in nature. (The) The son-in-law cannot have a legal right to his father-in-law`s property and building, even if he spent an amount on the construction of the building,” HC said in issuing its verdict in Davis Raphel v. Hendry Thomas.