The property in the hands of your vendor was his absolute property.I dont think that the property is ancestral in nature because the vendor's father inherited the property as his share from an oral or unregistered partition from his father's self acquired property, therefore the property which is legally an absolute property of the vendor's father can be disposed by him in any manner as he desires, there is no question for any grievance by the left out child/children (daughters). The suit filed by them is vexatious and has no legal validity for a claim of share as partition or otherwise. If you have been impleaded as a defendant, it is because being a purchaser you have become a necessary party to suit. You can engage an advocate and challenge the issue properly and in support of of your statement you can even produce a back dated legal opinion by an advocate about the status of the property purchased. Do not leave the mater unchallenged in the court, because in Bangalore such land mafias are found menacingly abundant, I am afraid that the vendor may also due to greed of money might have colluded with the so called plaintiff and will abandon the case unattended to become exparte, will compel the other defendants to arrive at compromise situation or negotiable table so that to avoid further tortures and litigation expenses, the other defendants may shell out the money demanded by the plaintiff. This game plan are being notoriously adopted by many in Bangalore for the past many years, do not become a victim to such traps. Your purchase is legitimate, you can fight it till end, you will get justice.

1) court will direct maintenance of status quo pending hearing and final disposal of suit

2) sister has share in ancestral property

3) the contents of partition deed and other documents mentioned by you have to be peruse for further advice

The Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005 (the“amendment Act”) Section 6 was enacted to enlarge the rights of a daughter, married and unmarried both and to bring her at par with a son or any male member of a joint HinduFamily governed by the Mitakshara law. It also sought to bring the female line of descentat an equal level with the male line of descent, including children of pre-deceased daughter of pre-deceased daughter.

By the way of the amendment Act, the daughter of a coparcener has been admitted in

coparcenary and after the commencement of the Amendment Act the daughter is a

coparcener in her own right. The daughter now has the same rights and liabilities in the

coparcenary property as the son. This means that a daughter along with a son is liable

for debts of joint family. The daughter is also entitled to dispose of her share of the

coparcenery property or her interest thereof by way of a will.

However this section has was enforced on 09 September 2005 is prospective in operation and asper the Bombay High Court judgement daughters born before 9 September 2005,

would get rights in coparcenaryproperty upon death of their father-coparcener on or after 9 September 2005.

Since the land was sold in year 2000, before the enactment of this amendment, so the sale was valid as per law and the daugthers are not entitled for share in land.

So we suggest you take this ground and defend your case

Its been twelve years or more and hence the laws of limitation might come to your aid.

However such claims are always subject to contest so make sure that you are represented by a competent lawyer.

Also do note that retaining the possession of your part in very crucial and maintain such possession.

In short chances of the sister succeeding against you are remote. The worse result might be to honour some payment towards her but the chances of these are rare. Also such litigation in ordinary circumstances take time so you need not worry immediately.

I1) n 2001 (1) CTC 112 [A.C.Lakshmipathy and another v. A.M.Chakrapani Reddiar and five others], the Division Bench of this Court elaborately considered the family arrangement/unregistered partition. After referring to relevant provisions from Indian Registration Act, 1908 and Stamp Act, 1899 as well as the decisions of the Supreme Court and also the earlier decisions of this Court, the Division Bench held as under:-

"42. To sum up the legal position (I)A family arrangement can be made orally.

(II)If made orally, there being no document, no question of registration arises.

(III)If the family arrangement is reduced to writing and it purports to create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest of any immovable property, it must be properly stamped and duly registered as per the Indian Stamp Act and Indian Registration Act.

(IV)Whether the terms have been reduced to the form of a document is a question of fact in each case to be determined upon a consideration of the nature of phraseology of the writing and the circumstances in which and the purpose with which it was written.

(V)However, a document in the nature of a Memorandum, evidencing aevidencing a family arrangement already entered into and had been prepared as a record of what had been agreed upon, in order that there are no hazy notions in future, it need not be stamped or registered.

(VI)Only when the parties reduce the family arrangement in writing with the purpose of using that writing as proof of what they had arranged and where the arrangement is brought about by the document as such, that the document would require registration as it is then that it would be a document of title declaring for future what rights in what properties the parties possess.

(VII)If the family arrangement is stamped but not registered, it can be looked into for collateral purposes.

(VIII)Whether the purpose is a collateral purpose, is a question of fact depends upon facts and circumstances of each case. A person can not claim a right or title to a property under the said document, which is being looked into only for collateral purposes.

(IX)A family arrangement which is not stamped and not registered cannot be looked into for any purpose in view of the specific bar in Section-35 of the Indian Stamp Act."

18. In 2001 (1) T.L.N.J. 191 [Venkatachala Moopar (died) and others v. Balasubramanian] and 2001 (3) CTC 328 [K.Pattabiraman v. K.Banumathi and four others], the single Judges of this Court held that "unregistered document though cannot be the basis for proving title can be looked into for deciding the nature and character of possession".

2) in your case partition deed is not stamped and regsitered . court can look into partition deed for collateral purpose for determining whether there is partition or not .

3) once partition has been made property ceases to be of ancestral nature and would be regarded as self acquired property

4) daughter would have share in self acquired of father and can claim their share

5) hence court may grant stay against creation of third party rights pending hearing and final disposal of the suit

1. The partition deed had to be registered. In the absence of registration the sale made to you is legally vitiated. The claim of the married sister of the seller can sustain the test of law.

2. Since the sister has gone to court you should enter defence to contest the case as you have a substantial interest in the outcome of the case. If the court allows the claim if the sister then you may be evicted from the property.

3. There are good chance of the court passing a stay order, which you can oppose.

4. Engage a lawyer and get going.

Hi,

Any legal document related to property has to be registered as per 'Registration Act' otherwise it has no legal validity. You should have taken 'no objection' from other siblings at the time of purchase. The sister is correctly claiming her share since she too is a legal heir in her father's property. You must compensate her.