The Delhi High Court ruled that a Hindu individual cannot claim a share in a grandparent’s property during the lifetime of their parent. The case before the Court involved a woman who filed a suit seeking partition of property left by her deceased grandfather. She contended that the property was ancestral—though self-acquired by her grandfather—and hence entitled her to a portion of it. The defendants, consisting of her father and paternal aunt, countered that, under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, especially Section 8, they alone inherited the property upon their father’s (i.e., the grandfather’s) death, since the plaintiff’s father was alive at the time; and that a grandchild who is not the child of any pre-deceased child of the deceased falls outside the class of heirs entitled to succeed when the parent is living.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, in the judgment, referred to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, observing that in cases of intestate death among Hindus, the property of the male Hindu devolves upon his Class I heirs “to the exclusion of all other persons.” The Court noted that grandchildren who are not children of a pre-deceased child are not included among Class I heirs when the parent is alive. It is only when a Class I heir predeceases the deceased that their children (i.e. the grandchildren) may step into their shoes under Class I, but not otherwise.
The Court also explained the impact of the Hindu Succession Act on the concept of “ancestral” property. It said that prior to the Act, property inherited from one’s father, father’s father, or father’s father’s father would be deemed ancestral in the hands of the holder, and then a son would acquire an immediate right by birth in that ancestral property. However, the enactment of the Hindu Succession Act brought a significant change: property inherited by Class I heirs under intestate succession becomes their absolute property—not joint family property. Accordingly, when the grandfather died, the plaintiff’s father (being alive) acquired the property absolutely under Section 8, leaving no recognized share for the grandchild while the father is alive.
The Court held that since the plaintiff’s father was alive at the time of the grandfather’s death, the suit property devolved solely upon him (and the paternal aunt, if applicable) under Section 8, and that the father’s share in that property was his absolute property thereby giving no room for the plaintiff to claim a share. The plaintiff’s claim was therefore rejected as not recognized under the rules of succession per Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.