1) on grand father death his property would devolve on 3 daughters and 3 sons equally

2) on demise of father his one sixth share devolves on your mother , you and your siblings

3) it is not ancestral property.

4) property which has remained undivided for four generations is ancestral property

5) 2 daughters can relinquish share in property for benefit of other legal heirs

6) your aunt has equal share in property

7) on,y if it is ancestral property andfather died before 2005 would daughter not have share in ancestral property

8) court would partition property equally among 4 legal heirs

1) A daughter can only hold a right to the ancestral property if the father has died after this amendment came into force in 2005, the Supreme Court rules. In other words, the father would have to be alive till September 9, 2005, for the daughter to become a co-sharer of his property along with her male siblings.

2) basically, the share in the property for female depends basing on several facts but not only date of marriage. Even if a lady gets married in 1960's and the family have not partitioned their proprties till 2012 then that lady have right over the properties to be shared. If you are able to prove that the partition of properties were already happened before 1980 then you need not her any share or otherwise you have to give her equal 50% share in the property of your grand parents.

1. Your third aunt is free to give her share to anyone she desires. There are no fetters on her right to do so.

2. The 2005 amendment applies to only ancestral property. If the property in question was the self acquired or separate property of your grandfather then it is not ancestral in the hands of his children, as a corollary thereto the share of your aunt is at par with that of uncles.

As far as your aunts are concerned it is not ancestral property and they would have equal share in property

The ancestral property is inherited in equal shares to all the brothers and sisters.

As two of sisters are ready to give up the shares but one don't.

So 4 shares will be divided equally in two parts and 5th share will go to your uncle.

U have false information all the legal heirs and successors will have equal share irrespective of their gender. It aunt can gift her share to any one of her choice

She has an equal share, as that of your uncle and your father.

You are only entitled to claim the share of your father.

There is no partition of the properties till 2005 as you have mentioned, though your grandfather has inherited the properties on the death of your grandparents all their children has the equal share in the properties left by their parents.

The property will be divided into 6 equal shares (3 male members and 3 female members).

If your 2 aunts who are not interest in the properties are ready to release their share in favour of your father, your father can claim their share as well.

Make a release deed from your 2 aunts in favour of your father in respect of their share in the properties.

The amendment of Hindu succession Act 2005 doesn't affect any partition before [deleted]. But the same if not decided the women will have share as well as liability in the property. You have to approach the court with partition suit. The said amendment is reproduced here for your reference.

THE HINDU SUCCESSION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2005

NO. 39 OF 2005 [ 5th September, 2005.]

An Act further to amend the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

BE it enacted by Parliament in the Fifty- sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:-

1. Short title and commencement.-

(1) This Act may be called the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 .

(2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.

2. Amendment of section 4.- In section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (30 of 1956 ) (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), sub- section (2) shall be omitted.

3. Substitution of new section for section 6.- For section 6 of the principal Act, the following section shall be substituted, namely:-' 6. Devolution of interest in coparcenary property.- (1) On and from the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 , in a Joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law, the daughter of a coparcener shall,-

(a) by birth become a coparcener in her own right in the same manner as the son;

(b) have the same rights in the coparcenary property as she would have had if she had been a son;

(c) be subject to the same liabilities in respect of the said coparcenary property as that of a son, and any reference to a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to include a reference to a daughter of a coparcener: Provided that nothing contained in this sub- section shall affect or invalidate any disposition or alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which had taken place before the 20th day of December, 2004 .

(2) Any property to which a female Hindu becomes entitled by virtue of sub- section (1) shall be held by her with the incidents of coparcenary ownership and shall be regarded, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, or any other law for the time being in force, as property capable of being disposed of by her by testamentary disposition.

(3) Where a Hindu dies after the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 , his interest in the property of a Joint Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law, shall devolve by testamentary or intestate succession, as the case may be, under this Act and not by survivorship, and the coparcenary property shall be deemed to have been divided as if a partition had taken place and,-

(a) the daughter is allotted the same share as is allotted to a son;

(b) the share of the pre- deceased son or a pre- deceased daughter, as they would have got had they been alive at the time of partition, shall be allotted to the surviving child of such pre- deceased son or of such pre- deceased daughter; and

(c) the share of the pre- deceased child of a pre- deceased son or of a pre- deceased daughter, as such child would have got had he or she been alive at the time of the partition, shall be allotted to the child of such pre- deceased child of the pre- deceased son or a pre- deceased daughter, as the case may be. Explanation.- For the purposes of this sub- section, the interest of a Hindu Mitakshara coparcener shall be deemed to be the share in the property that would have been allotted to him if a partition of the property had taken place immediately before his death, irrespective of whether he was entitled to claim partition or not.

(4) After the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 , no court shall recognise any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great- grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great- grandfather solely on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, of such son, grandson or great- grandson to discharge any such debt: Provided that in the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 , nothing contained in this sub- section shall affect-

(a) the right of any creditor to proceed against the son, grandson or great- grandson, as the case may be; or

(b) any alienation made in respect of or in satisfaction of, any such debt, and any such right or alienation shall be enforceable under the rule of pious obligation in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable as if the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 had not been enacted. Explanation.- For the purposes of clause (a), the expression" son"," grandson" or" great- grandson" shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson or great- grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 .

(5) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to a partition, which has been effected before the 20th day of December, 2004 . Explanation.- For the purposes of this section" partition" means any partition made by execution of a deed of partition duly registered under the Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908 ) or partition effected by a decree of a court.'.

4. Omission of section 23.- Section 23 of the principal Act shall be omitted.

5. Omission of section 24.- Section 24 of the principal Act shall be omitted.

6. Amendment of section 30.- In section 30 of the principal Act, for the words" disposed of by him", the words" disposed of by him or by her" shall be substituted.

7. Amendment of Schedule.- In the Schedule to the principal Act, under the sub- heading" Class 1", after the words" widow of a pre- deceased son of a pre- deceased son", the words" son of a pre- deceased daughter of a pre- deceased daughter; daughter of a pre- deceased daughter of a pre- deceased daughter; daughter of a pre- deceased son of a pre- deceased daughter; daughter of a pre- deceased daughter of a pre- deceased son" shall be added. ---- T. K. VISWANATHAN, Secy. to the Govt. of India.

1) Yes ! Its ancestral property.

2) Regarding you're aunty share in the ancestral property. It's depends upon main factor

a) when your aunty's marriage took place date of marriage.

b) Property is still joint or separated ?

c) When your father's death took place date of deceased etc

In the Ancestral property all will get equal share . even great grand child also have equal share with father and uncle.

now share is further reduce by inheritance right of great grand children.

AND 2005 amendment has nothing to do with daughter`s right of inheritance. daughter always had equal share in the property with brother. NOW great grand daughter also have coparcenary right in the ancestral property.

My Question is does she get the equal share? Yes, as per S.6 of the 2005 Act.

Or my uncles are try to cheat me? I read somewhere since my grandpa and grandma died before 2005 daughter don't get equal share. - Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall affect or invalidate any disposition or alienation including any partition or testamentary disposition of property which had taken place before the

20th day of December, 2004.

As partition is taking place now, the death of her father becomes irrelevant.

It was the 'separate property' of your grandpa, consequently it is not ancestral in the hands of your aunt. Hence, she is free to give it to anyone she desires.

This property will devolve equally on all the legal heirs of your grandfather after his intestate death.

The legal heirs are his own children which includes your father.

If two of your paternal aunts are giving up their share in the property, they may have to execute a registered release deed relinquishing their rights in your favor.

The other paternal aunt who is not willing to give away her share in the property cannot be forced and she has to be given her own legitimate share in the property.

This is not ancestral property, it is a property being inherited by the legal heirs/successors in interest under the provisions of law of intestate succession.

Therefore the daughters of your grandfather are having equal rights in the property.

The Property was inherited to my grandpa from his father. In that case it is ancestral property right? None of the properties were purchased by him. In that case will my aunt gets equal share?

Since your grandfather inherited the property on his name and the same was in his possession and enjoyment till his death, it becomes his own and absolute property, hence it cannot be considered as ancestral property.

Therefore upon your grandfather's intestate death your paternal aunts, on the basis of legal heirs or successors in interest are entitle to an equal share in the properties left behind by your grandfather.