property transferred in 1993 ,  A came to know about it in 2019. Barred by limitation, 

The property belonged to 3 persons after the death of the grandfather ie mother and 2 daughters. Her will is invalid and hence both sisters have a share in the property. The court will accept her claim.

Was A aware of the will of grand mother ?

what was A doing for 27 years ?

property must have been transferred in B name on basis of consent of A 

delay of 27 years in filing suit would be fatal to the case 

A and B are lawfully legal heirs. 

The Court would accept and has to accept the case ,Partition Suit , and pass an order under section 6 of Hindu Succession Act 1956.

If the same is transfered through a legal partition or decree of the court then daughter will not have share. In the above case I don't think daughter will have an rightful share. 

If A has satisfyingly explain the delay of 29 years the court can accept her case. Recent decision . After the death of father his property distributed among his legal heirs - 2 daughters and wife. His wife has capacity to execute a will only for her share in the property.  So the perusal of totality of other evidence, cause of action described in plaint  and her claim over the property which describe in plaint can say the case will be rejected or accepted by court

The property was your maternal grandfather's self acquired property and daughters (married or unmarried) had a right to obtain equal share in it. 

At that point of time the property was not validly transferred in mother's name alone and consequently the will in favour of one daughter alone is not a valid will. 

Therefore the court can accept A's claim. 

However, A's claim is extremely delayed and it can be shown to be barred by limitation by proving that the will and transfer in favour of B in 1993 was in her knowledge.

In order to understand the exact position we will have to go through the contents of plaint filed by A, for which you can contact any lawyer on this website. 

Google Knowledge and miscellaneous information would not help you in your matter.

If you can amend section 6 of Hindu Succession Act 1956  and turn down recent ruling dated 11th August 2020 held by Full bench pronounced the ruling by Justice Arun Mishra for inheritance of property by daughters in the property of father. 

We have more than 2575 Statutes, bylaws, regulations, ordinances, proclamations and provisions of Central Government and State Government apart from The Constitution of India 1949 which is main stream of all Act, Statutes, Special Statutes, ordinances, proclamations, procedural law,substantive law etc.

Please be with your subject matter specifically when The Act ,Statutes and rulings of Apex Court is clear and sound without any latent or patent ambiguity. 

We have answered your question as per law and ruling of Supreme Court of India. 

Will of mother of B is invalid in view of Hindu Succession Act 

You cannot claim defence of adverse possession against family member as possession of one is regarded as possession of all 

your defence should be that transfer of property was done only with consent of A in writing . Unfortunately you don’t have registered gift deed or relinquishment deed executed by A for her share in property

that claim of A would be barred by limitation 

1. IF Grandfather died intestate (without WILL)   in 1988, THEN at time of his death, "ALL" the residual Legal Heirs (his Wife & 2 daughters) were entitled to EQUAL share in GF's properties, without any exceptions, whatsoever.... even if daughters were married.

2. GM is holding property in capacity of Trustee and CANNOT WILL away entire property to ANYBODY and GM is bound by law to divide property & give respective to each legal heirs (Self & 2 daughters).

3. Be virtue of above, Daughter-A is entitled to her share in her Father's property who died intestate (without WILL).

You can object to all the issues if any claim filed. You can't stop anyone to approach court even if she has a bad case

Dear ma'am/sir,

We cannot read each others' answers and hence everyone might have a different opinion. Law is not a science and there is a reason why arguments take place in the court and judgments are often reversed in appeals. 

As I told you earlier, the answer can be given only after looking into the contents of the plaint and after a detailed consultation after knowing all the facts. For e.g. it is unclear how the property was registered solely in name of your mother, and now you have stated a new fact regarding A giving her consent. 

The law of adverse possession is not applicable here in your case. Defence of Adverse possession cannot be taken in family matters for partition. Adverse possession and suit being barred by limitation are two different things. 

You can take a defense that her claim is barred by limitation period (which differs according to the claim).

For eg. If her claim is to set aside the will, the limitation period is three years. If her claim is to seek declaration of title, the limitation period is three years. If her claim is to seek partition, the limitation period is twelve years. 

Now calculation of these periods (i.e. from when will these periods begin to run) is another complex task and it depend upon the averments of the plaint and the cause of action. 

We cannot tell you the exact answer unless we go through the documents, for which you'll need to contact a lawyer and obtain a formal legal opinion. 

I hope you get my point. 

Best wishes. 

application would be barred by limitation. 

Your maternal cannot acquire the entire property left behind by her deceased husband and cannot claim title o the entire property.

If at she had written any Will, that can be executed insofar as her share in the property, i.e., one third.

A is one of the legal heirs of her deceased father hence she is entitled to a legitimate share out of her deceased father's property.

Her claim for a rightful share in the property is genuine and the court will accept her claim and allot her with one third share in the property.

Law of adverse possession is not applicable in the partition matter.

A partition suit can be filed at any time, a partition suit is not barred by limitation.

The legal fact is that A is the daughter and one of the legal heirs of her deceased father.

Being a legal heir she is entitled to a legitimate share in the properties left behind by her deceased husband.

The transfer of property made through an unregistered stamp paper is not legally valid, the court will refuse to recognise this invalid transfer.

There is no time limit for filing partition suit.

The provisions of HSA, 1956 is applicable to this situation.

Since this is not an ancestral property do not get confused over the amendment passed to this act in the year 2005, because that provisions are applicable for daughters right at par with the sons in the ancestral properties and not out of deceased father's property.

If you are still confused you can consult with a local advocate having experience in the subject or any other lawyer of this forum too for more clarifications.

Marriage dose not effect daughters inheritance right. Both had 1/3rd share each.

Mere signing as witness dose not transfer A`s right in property to B. A have 1/3rd share and her claim can refuse as barred by limitation.

To claim adverse possession against the co-sharer, it is necessary to establish the actual ouster of the co-sharer of the property.

1. Case will get dismissed because this claim is barred by limitation.

2. And property is transfered on name of your mother through will of your grandmother. 

Simple clear words.

Now she cannot claim the property that was transferred on the basis of a WILL

Get in touch ouch with me so that it can be discussed in detail.

Dear Sir/Madam,

You are suggested that the case by A is bound to be rejected by the Hon'ble Court. 

That is not an argument that why didn't she claim before. She has a share and she may claim anytime she likes.