Legal Question in Family Law in India

My grandfather migrated to India after partition and he was allotted agricultural land and house in Punjab. My grand father had gold business in Pakistan and he started the gold business in Punjab also in his name.

My grandfather also bought some more land from profits of agricultural income and gold business.

So, 60% land got after partition, they bought 40% more from same income, doing no job. (20% in name of grandfather and 20% in name of father). It means my grandfather name had 80 % land (60% + 20%) and father name 20%.

My grandfather died in 1998 and all property transferred to my father because he is only Son. Means 80% land transferred to my father and 20 % he had already in his name.

There were two houses, Gold business in name of grand father, and all this also transferred to my father.

I have evidence of kursinama for agricultural land where there is name of father, grandfather and great grandfather is mentioned,

I have evidence in MC records HOUSE TAX ( ALL FILE ) where when my grandfather gold business started in Punjab is mentioned and Two houses in name of my Grandfather.

So, all property transferred to my father because he is only SON.

We are three sisters and one brother. My father died on June 2010. My brother is showing the unregistered WILL to us. In WILL all three daughters are excluded and all property is in the name of my mother and my brother. The WILL wrote in 2002 in plain paper( not registered) and my father died on June 2010, and WILL signed by notary on JULY 2010, and Shown to me August 2010.

SO, my questions are

1. When I have to file a civil case which one line is better

A) Being a coparcener I have equal right in property

or

B) As per Hindu Succession Amendment Act 2005,Section 6, I am a coparcener, having equal right as to son, have right in agricultural property [ Section 4(2)], gold business, profits in both agricultural and gold business. and as Section 23 omitted and now have right in dwelling house and right to partition.

I am asking you because some lawyer suggest me you only use coparcener [line (A)] and there is no need of [line (B)]. I am confused how judge come to know that what I am demanding because all equality is given to daughters in 2005. Explain me which line is more logically true and why the lawyer say me not mention Act 2005, Section 6, Section 4(2) and Section 23.

2. Is this is considered a Ancestral property

3. Was my father had a right to write a WILL on all property.

4. Whether the WILL is considered valid because, property ancestral, Notary signed after father death.

5. My brother showing me a letter on plain paper ( NO DATE), mentioning that my father suspended me from all property.( only name of one daughter).

Have a good day

2 Answers from Attorneys

Related Questions & Answers

More Family Law, Divorce, Child Custody and Adoption questions and answers in India

Looking for something else?