Bramarabha purchased land of 1.05 acres on 1967. On 1973 she made a registered deed to her brother anjaneyulu in that 0.50 acres transfer on his own right now and remaining 0.55 acres transfer after her death because she doesn't have children . Anjaneyulu in his right of 50 cents , he sold to 25 cents to third party on 1978 and he died on 1981. Anjaneyulu have one son (nageswara rao) and three daughters ( venkata ratnam, mangamma and umamaheshwari). On 2004 nageswara rao executed registeted sale deed to his daughter- in law who is daughter of venkataratnam.Because nageswara rao suffered as AIDS decease for one year all costs and maintenance borne by venkataratnam that's why he registered sale deed its agreed by three daughters orally but not signed on document and he died on 2004. Nageswarao have made three marriages because his wifes died one after other , third wife alive and she has one son ,first wife had one son. Nageswararao first wife son and in the presence of bramaramba sold 21 cents out of 55 cents to third party on 2008 . bramaramba died on 2009. Nageswara rao third wife after born son didn't living together for 25 years . Finally Anjaneyulu wife alive and what's rights the rights and shares of Anjaneyulu wife, three daughters and son nageswara rao's two sons and third wife.
1)1)on brother Ajaneyulu death his wife , son and 3 daughters had equal share in his property
2) son could have sold land to his daughter in law only if the 3 daughters of Anjaneyulu had given their written consent . they could have executed gift deed or relinquishment deed in favour of their brother
3)on nageshwar death his third wife , son from third wife, son from first wife would inherit his share in property
How much share they would have get share in the property
on Ajaneyulu death son nageswara rao has only one fifth share in property
2) nageshwar rao one fifth share in property would devolve on his third wife and 2 sons .
In this case one of daughters and third wife son issued notice .If they would win the case legally what share they would have get.
daughter can claim her one fifth share in her deceased father Ajaneyulu property
2) she can claim 0.15 acres of land
3) third wife can claim her one third share in 0.15 acres standing in name of deceased husband property
In this case 21 cents are sold for whoever filed notice one of daughters and written evidence not available but whoever signed witnesses signatory are ready to tell what happened really. Evidence available for third wife Aadhar card husband's name column some others name appeared and third wife son study certificates and Aadhar card guardian name appeared. Is this evidences sufficient for reducing their ratio.
1) it is your case that nageshwar rao in 2004 executed regd sale deed
2) to quote its agreed by three daughters orally but not signed on document and he died on 2004.
3) in case 3 daughter of Anjaneyulu have not signed sale deed they can always file suit to set aside sale deed
4) it would be their case that 21 cents were sold by Nageswar Rao fraudulently and they had equal share in the the said land
5) the court is concerned whether daughters have executed relinquishment or gift deed or not
6) witness testimony would not deprive the 3 daughters of their equal share in property
7) further your query is silent on whether Ajaneyulu wife predeceased her son or not . she would have equal share in the property standing in name of her husband
8)on nageshwar Rao death her 2 sons and widow would have equal share in property standing in nageshwar rao name
9) even if nageshwar rao third wife son not living together for 25 years would not deprive them of equal share in deceased father property
10) nageshwar Rao could during his lifetime sell property standing in his name without consent of his third wife and 2 sons
In this case 21 cents are sold for whoever filed notice one of daughters and written evidence not available but whoever signed witnesses signatory are ready to tell what happened really. Evidence available for third wife Aadhar card husband's name column some others name appeared and third wife son study certificates and Aadhar card guardian name appeared. Is this evidences sufficient for reducing their ratio. Anjaneyulu' wife still alive. If we are in nageswara rao' s first wife son's side what can be do for his benefit.
if Ajaneyulu wife i still alive on her husband demise she had one fifth share in her husband property
2) it is surprising that nageshwar Rao sold 21 cents of land without consent of his mother and 3 sisters
3) your query is contradictory . on one hand you say On 2004 nageswara rao executed registeted sale deed to his daughter- in law who is daughter of venkataratnam.
4) later in same query you say that Nageswararao first wife son and in the presence of bramaramba sold 21 cents out of 55 cents to third party on 2008 .
5) which is the correct version ?
6) it is your query that If we are in nageswara rao' s first wife son's side what can be do for his benefit.
7)he should be willing to share property standing in nageshwar rao with third wife and her son as they have equal share in property
8) amicable settlement is best option as in case legal proceedings are filed by third wife and her son you would have to give them equal share in property
Anjaneyulu's wife still alive. If we are in nageswara rao's first wife son's side what can be do for his benefit. And that 21 cents sold by nageswara rao's first son in the presence of bramaramba, Anjaneyulu's wife and three daughters orally but not written consent.
bramaramba had executed gift deed in favour of her brother Anjaneyulu'
2) once gift deed is executed by donor duly stamped and regsitered she has no share in property
3) bramaramba presence as witness is immaterial
4) if nageshwar rao son has executed sale deed in 2008 in favour of third party for 21 cents of land the sale would be set aside on application by third wife , her son , 3 daughters of anajaneyulu
5) nageshwar roa had no power to sell the land without consent of other legal heirs . no consent was given by the 3 daughters
6) had nageshwar rao executed will bequeathing 21 cents land to his son only then sale of land would have been valid
Out of 50 cents , 25 cents sold by Anjaneyulu and remaining 25 cents sold by nageswara rao.Out of 55 cents in hands of bramaramba 21 cents sold by Nageswara rao's first wife' s son.All these are orally agreed by Anjaneyulu' s wife ,bramaramba and three daughters but without notice of nageswara rao third wife and son.
sale by Anjaneyulu of 25 cents of land is valid
2) consent of Anjaneyulu wife, his 3 daughters was not required
3) sale of 25 cents by nageshwar Rao can be challenged by 3 daughters of Anjaneyulu as they have not relinquished their share in property . oral consent is no consent
4) admittedly they have not even signed as witnesses .
5) 3 daughters would take the plea that they were not aware of sale of land by nageshwar rao and have filed suit immediately on being aware of fraudulent sale of land
6)however nageshwar third wife and son cannot challenge the sale by nageshwar rao of 25 cents of land as it is not ancestral property .
7) third wife and son would have claim in respect of 21 cents sold by nageshwar son
Out of Bramapraba's 1.05 acres of property that was settled to her brother by a registered deed, her brother taken possession of 50 acres and sold 25 cents to a third party, thus another 25 cents are still lying in his name and he is reported to have died intestate.
In the balance of 55 cents, Nageswar rao has no rights to sell 21 cents of property but since it has been accepted by all other legal heirs especially by Brhamapraba who was the actual owner, we can even ignore that now.
Now the main problem is sharing of remaining property amicably among the surviving legal heirs upon the death of Brahamapraba.
The legal heirs of Anjayanelu are the people who are entitled to acquire the properties now remaining as his legal heirs and successors in interest.
The legal heirs shall be his wife, his children consisting three daughters and one son. The legal heirs of the son, who is reported to have died intestate, shall be entitled to acquire his shares in the properties. The legal heirs of the deceased son shall be his children out of different marriages and his surviving wife.
Thus the remaining properties can be amicably divided into five equal parts on mutually agreed terms to avoid litigation and disputes. The wife of deceased Anjayanelu shall be entitled to one such equal share.
How much share they would have get share in the property
If it is an amicable partition then it shall be on mutually agreed terms otherwise if the parties are not ready for mutual partition or amicable situation, then the properties shall be divided into five equal parts and each one shall be entitled to one such share
In this case one of daughters and third wife son issued notice .If they would win the case legally what share they would have get.
This daughter of deceased Anjayanelu shall be entitled to 1/5th share and the son of the third wife shall be entitled to a share out of the 1/5th share that belongs to his deceased father.
Is this evidences sufficient for reducing their ratio. Anjaneyulu' wife still alive. If we are in nageswara rao' s first wife son's side what can be do for his benefit.
Nageshwar Rao's first wife son is also one among the legal heirs of Nageswara Rao.
He is entitled to an equal share in his deceased father's 1/5th entitled share in the properties left behind by his deceased father Anjayanelu.
Anjaneyulu's wife still alive. If we are in nageswara rao's first wife son's side what can be do for his benefit. And that 21 cents sold by nageswara rao's first son in the presence of bramaramba, Anjaneyulu's wife and three daughters orally but not written consent.
The 21 cents of property by Nageswara rao's first wife son sold at that time was at behest of Bramhapraba actually belonged to his grandfather though Brahamapraba had life interest over it, hence that sale was illegal and can be held invalid and not binding on other legal heirs, However since it is more than three years from the date of sale and there is no representation made by other legal heirs to restore or cancel the same for over 12 years now, this sale may not be cancelled at this stage.
There can be no claim as well as, to this effect, at this stage.
Out of 50 cents , 25 cents sold by Anjaneyulu and remaining 25 cents sold by nageswara rao.Out of 55 cents in hands of bramaramba 21 cents sold by Nageswara rao's first wife' s son.All these are orally agreed by Anjaneyulu' s wife ,bramaramba and three daughters but without notice of nageswara rao third wife and son.
If nageswara rao's tird wife and her son were aware of this sale what prevented them fo issuing a legal noice seeking clarification and declaring that sale a invalid.
A suit to be filed by them seeking cancellation of the sale deed in this regard may be barred by limitation except a partition suit.
They can very well file a partition suit by including all those properties sold long ago too, seeking their legitimate share in all the properties.
Partition suit shall be the last resort or relief.