Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 204

4. Father - Need For Relocation

The other point that may be considered is that, -

Because of this amendment the persons in Class-II Entry II and III are pushed up and take place with Class-I heirs. By this, these 3rd generation persons remotely connected with the deceased person take preference over a very close relative, namely

"Father" the only heir in Class II Entry 1 and

"Brother" in Class II Entry II i.e. 3 and "Sister" in Class II

Entry II i.e. 4.

"Father", who is certainly a very close relative rather than any one coming in the Class II Entry 2 and 3 list, assumes more importance in view of the recent enactment of the Parliament to provide maintenance to parents in "The Senior Citizens (Maintenance, Protection and Welfare) Act, 2007" wherein it is now made mandatory that every person should maintain his parents and failure will result in punishment.

While so, it is but natural and logical to expect that a father should be given the right of inheritance of the property of his son like a mother. As such pushing "Father" beyond a III generation "Daughter's daughter's daughter" etc., has no meaning. Why a preference to the more close relatives should be given-up, in place of 3rd generation relatives who in our society may not have any contact with the person dying intestate - is not known.

Further, we have to see one more point that is almost all (Class I heirs) sons, daughters and grand children have the duty to maintain the parents or grand parents as per the 2007 Act. There is no duty cast upon the great grand children to look after their great grand parents, whereas they have been given equal right to share as Class I heirs. This is certainly an anomaly. This can be rectified only by including the "Father" in Class-I.

As suggested earlier, we have to consider that the desirability of elevating the father as a Class I heir with the mother was that he may not be the lesser heir than a daughter's daughter in the list particularly when we are now thinking of enforcing, by law, of obligation of the children to maintain their parents.

Proposal to amend the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 as amended by Act 39 of 2005 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys