It is not ancestral property
2) all properties were purchased by father
3) on dissolution of firm sons received share in property
4) as far as their children are concerned property would not be ancestral
Are the properties ancestral in nature or self-acquired?
'A’ (Father) purchased a set of properties in between 1961, 1962 & 1964. He had 3 son's namely 'X','Y','Z'. Registered partnership firm was started in [deleted]. The same was re-constituted (or) altered on [deleted], with the members being 'A'(The Father) and 'X','Y','Z' (The Son's), all residing at the same place. A dispute arose among the family members/partners and referred it to panel of 8 Arbitrators for Settlement by a deed of reference dated [deleted]. The arbitrators gave their award, allocating the assets and liabilities and dissolved the firm. And a deed of dissolution of the partnership was made and executed by the partners on [deleted]. Until the dissolution of the firm, the properties remained in the name of 'A'(Father). All taxes and Revenues to the Government was paid by 'A' (Father) only. All Government records pertaining to the properties were in 'A's (Father) name only. No property was purchased from the firm. All properties were individually purchased by ‘A’ (Father). It is only after the dissolution was made, and through a release deed, the son's (X, Y, Z) got their Share of property(s). At the time of settlement/dissolution/division, all the son's (X, Y, Z) had male children. Now. For 'X','Y','Z' (Sons), are the properties they obtained through the above said means are ancestral in nature or self-acquired?
Asked 5 years ago in Property Law
Religion: Hindu
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
14 Answers
Until the dissolution of the firm, the properties remained in the name of 'A'(Father). All taxes and Revenues to the Government was paid by 'A' (Father) only. All Government records pertaining to the properties were in 'A's (Father) name only. No property was purchased from the firm. All properties were individually purchased by ‘A’ (Father). So would it be Self Acquired Property for the 'X','Y','Z' (Sons)? If not Not ancestral?
Asked 5 years ago
The are received after partition they will be as good as self acquired.
It is not ancestral property.it would be like self acquired for X YZ.
the property was self acquired property of A
his sons got their respective shares in that property NOT by inheritance (upon demise of A) but through paritition
thus the shares which the sons receive from the self acquired property of the father when the father is alive, becomes the self acquired property of the sons
had A passed away and his property was distributed among his sons as per Hindu Succession, then the shares which the sons would get would have to be held by the sons as ancestral property with their sons
that is, in event A died, the property which his sons would inherit from their father, would be ancestral in the hands of such sons and they would have to hold their share as such with their respective lineal descendants
It would be self acquired property for the sons
Dear Client,
Properties are self acquired.
And in actual, there`s was no need of settlement, as all properties were purchased by A, so after dissolution, properties will vest back in A only.
Hi
1) The properties at the hands of the father are self acquired properties by the very fact that the properties remained in the name of Father and all taxes and revenues were paid by the father only at all time prior to execution of release deed.
2) After the Execution of release deed , the properties which were obtained by X,Y,Z by way of Settlement/Dissolution/ Release deed and as such these properties will also be Self acquired properties of X,Y,Z.
3) In order for the property to be classified as ancestral property the said Property should be inherited by a Hindu from his father, father’s father or father’s fathers’ father, is ancestral property and Any property acquired by the Hindu great grand father, which then passes undivided down the next three generations up to the present generation of great grand son/daughter and the said Property should be four generation old.
4) You may also pursue the Judgment of Supreme Court in Uttam vs Subagh Singh, Civil Appeal no. 2360/2016 to understand the concept of self acquired properties, ancestral properties etc.
Hope this information is useful
Sorry, It is not an ancestral property. The ancestral property means , the undivided property has to come from 3 male descendants. But, these properties are concerned, it was purchased by A and he invested the same to form the partnership firm. Therefore, at the time of started the partnership firm, the property would lost its individual owner's right and become a property of partnership firm. After dissolution of partnership firm the property was distributed/partitioned amoung the partners. Thereafter it will be treated as individual properties of X, Y, and Z.
Dear Sir,
The properties are all self acquired. The following example may be viewed to understand very clearly.
=============================================================================
Dear Sir,
What does the grandparent's property law in India state? Does the grandson own the right to the property?
All property's owned by a Hindu person devolves onto his class one legal heir's.
Now to the specific scenario's in ur example (for sake of convenience I'm presuming ur ur grandfather has only one legal heir)
Senario1: The property is self acquired by your Grandfather, in such case upon his demise interstate (without a will) the property would devolve upon ur Father and not you. In case your farther passes away before your grandfather then it such case it would be devolve upon you, your mother and ur siblings equally.
Scenario 2: the property in question is self acquired by ur grandfather father ( ur great grand farther) - would devolve same as scenario 1.
Scenario 3: the property in question is self acquired by ur grandfather grand father ( ur great great grand farther) - would devolve same as scenario 1.
Scenario 4: the property in question is self acquired by ur grandfathers great grand father ( ur great great great grand farther) - then in such a case you would be entitled to the property by birth as it becomes ur ancestral property.
To give you more clarity on the concept of Ancestral Property's : any property which passes undivided down 4 generations of male lineage is called ancestral property. The right to such property acures at birth unlike other laws of inheritance where right arises upon the death of the the owner.
Hope this brings some clarity to your question and your sense of entitlements.
it is the ancestral property of XYZ. XYZ got the property out of dissolution of partnership firm but A was the owner of property and he brought his self acquired property in common hochpoch of partnership firm. XYZ became partner of the firm without investing any thing.so it is ancestral property of XYZ.
For the son's the property would be treated as self acquired property,and not ancestral property as only undivided property for four generations can be termed as ancestral property as per law.
It would be deemed to be as self acquired property of the father.
No the properties are not ancestral in nature
Yes it will be considered to the the self acquired property of X Y Z.
An ancestral property is one which remains undivided for four generations.
Regards