I presume deed of partition has been duly stamped and registered

2) partition deed would be final and binding on the parties

3) daughter cannot share in property wherein partition has already taken place

See if the properties are.of grand father even in that case they are as good as self acquired and since the property is partitioned through registered deed she won't have any right in the property.

See even the cases of opponents are worth dismissing it would be better your father file his affidavit of examination and cross examinied she I know it would be very difficult for him but if possible then he should be if not then documentary evidence can be produced.

Further application of order 7 rule 11 for rejection of suit filed or not? If not file that before the court will decide that.

Father can execute POA in favour of family members to attend court on his behalf

He need not attend court on each date

Re partition can be claimed as property is ancestral. If the child is born after partition then also his right is not relinquished.

But limitation period is applied here. As even after that person became major i.e. 18 years old he did not approached court.

He can not now.

The same is barred by limitation.

If your parents were having an intention to give the fifth child a share then they could have give them the same during the lifetime.

Regards

1) As per limitations act court should not entertain this case, but thw child born in the year 1975 says he came to know that this property is partition in the year 1974 which was ancestral property than court may ask all partition to give his share.

You may request the court for making special arrangements for his cross examination. He may appoint POA sho May challenge the validity of the case. Ask the court to decide the application, the lower court will generally dismiss the same and then you may approach the HC.

Regards

In cases where a Daughter is both conceived and born after partition, two possibilities arise. Either the father might have taken her share at the time of the partition or he may not have taken a share.

If the father has taken (or reserved) a share for himself at the partition, the after-born daughter will become a coparcener with her father, and is not entitled to re-open the partition. After his father’s death, she will get the coparcenary property by survivorship.

if the father has not taken (or reserved) a share for himself at the time of partition, the after-born Daughter has a right to demand re-opening of the partition, and get the estate re-distributed. This rule applies, like the earlier one, to a partition between the father and his sons daughter.

Dear Client,

It was suppose to be settlement deed not partition deed, If executed by your father, non can dispute it.

Hi

The partition deed executed in the year 1972 will be valid in the eyes of law and your sister born in the year 1975 cannot question or reopen the partition that was done in the year 1972. There is NO infirmity or illegality in the partition of properties that were ancestral(grand father) by the survivors (i.e father and grand children) as partition can be done any time.

Your sister (born in 1972) is only entitle to claim a share of property allocated to your father after partition in the year 1972.

Also,since more than 45 years have passed since the partition , the same cannot be reopened now even by your sister who was born in the year 1975( she must be now 43 years of age now).

Under law, all documents that were executed prior to 30 years are presumed to be genuine and these cannot be challenged now.

Since it is a family matter, your father need not attend the court. Any one of the children can attend the court and depose on the document. Your father need not be cross examined and courts cannot draw adverse inference on the document just because your father did not appear in the court.

Also under law, nearest family member can also depose on behalf of the family to establish the document in court.

No worries on this at all.

Hope this information is useful.

1. Was your father alive when you had registered the partition deed of the properties of your grandfather inherited by your father?

2. If yes, then the said partition deed is invalid as it was your father's inherited property at that time on which you had no claim.

3. If your father was not alive at that time then all the legal heirs of your deceased father, including the unborn child, will have equal right on the properties left by your deceased father.

4. The fifth child of your late father can claim her share of her late father's properties and claim partition thereof.

1. He will not require to attend the Court on regular hearing days.

2. You can claim that it is not possible for him to medically withstand any stress which might arise during his cross examination and arrival at the Court and the Court might direct Govt. Hospital doctors to visit your father and submit report accordingly about the status of his heath.

3. The Court will pass order about your father's appearance before the Court for cross examination based on the report submitted by the Doctors of the Govt Hospital.

Was your father living was the time of the said partition, because the proeprty actually devolved on him only as a legal heir of his father.

Then it becomes his own property, by which he partitioned it to his children equally.

There is no question of intestate succession, hence the child born three years after this partition is not entitled to any share in this property in any manner.

My doubt is such strong in case(my father) should he be cross examined again in court?is there any chance him not attending court .

His opponent cases are case that can be easily dismissed.

If your father is bedridden then he can be examined at his home by an advocate commissioner and the opposite party can cross examine him simultaneously. A petition can be filed to this effect before the concerned court.

This case is not maintainable becasue your father is the absolute owner of the property he can give them to anyone of his choice, the person who did not get any share cannot be said to be aggrieved by this decision.