Illegitimate parpotha is legal heir

On 4th april 2011 (just four months ago), the Supreme court of India passed a landmark judgment that illegitimate children can now be legal ancestral heirs and that if there are both legitimate children and illegitimate children - property is to be divided equally between them.

Its depends if the property is ancestoral. as we know in BV property r made by DS, so its depends on her if she want to share the property with her illegal parpota. if she will disown her Nalayak pota, thn how her parpota can claim the property. ya if she will die without any will, thn pota or parpota can claim the property share.

dadisa will never disown her nalayak pota 😆 .

Originally posted by: tinoo

dadisa will never disown her nalayak pota 😆.

Infact, when she dies, she will set up a dharamveer singh trust fund to take care of him.

Also, for the heir (parpotha) - dadisa'sproperty is definitely ancestral. For dadisa herself it may be own.

Supreme court of India has adjudged (4th april 2011) that illegitimate children have a right to all property - ancestral and that acquired by their parents.

she will disown or not its other things but she can surely. As i hv seen the property is made by DS and not ancestral. They hd shown whole property was snatched by mahavir singh who hd bad eye on DS and thn she left and made her own property.

But as far as heir is concerned -- dadisa is his ancestor. so her property (in his eyes) is ancestral.

It is my understanding that the house is not her (d) ancestral home and she would be within limits if she gifts it to whomever she pleases, as she is under no moral constraints of inheritance. If she dies without doing so then they can fight it out in the courts.

Originally posted by: tinoo

But as far as heir is concerned -- dadisa is his ancestor. so her property (in his eyes) is ancestral.

All ancestral property at some time or other had to be acquired property by the preceding generations. Someone has to earn it.

in her life time she hs full rit to disown from her property. Thts why i told if she will die without will thn it will become ancestral not in her lifetime.

Originally posted by: ankit111

in her life time she hs full rit to disown from her property. Thts why i told if she will die without will thn it will become ancestral not in her lifetime.

But as far as heir is concerned -- dadisa is his ancestor. so her property (in his eyes) is ancestral.

Naaa ancestral property means it has to pass several some places three for generations

I was about to make a post on this topic, thank you tinoo for making it. Yes, the illegal parpota will have legal rights to his father's property--but only ancestral.

"In India it is very unfortunate that though the illegitimate child has been granted the status of legitimacy, the Amended Hindu Succession Act and Hindu Marriage Act have failed to protect the interests of innocent children who have no control over their birth. Though a child born out of wedlock is not considered illegitimate any more in the eyes of the law, the same child is not entitled to a share in the property that is inherited by his parents. Vikramjit Sen, Judge, Delhi High Court, known for his progressive rulings, says that a provision of the amended Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act "bestows the same legitimacy rights on the offspring of a voidable marriage provided the conception had not occurred after the voidable marriage was declared to be a nullity."

However, the issue of illegality does not get solved by just getting access to property. The illegal child will face difficulty in every step of his life later on. With more and more things in India becoming highly documented, the illegality of the parent's marriage can lead to problems for the child, including social stigma. My parents had a traditional Hindu marriage but they had to do register their marriage in court marriage when they applied for passport and also they will need proper documentation when they apply for visa to visit me. Many schools require complete records of parents before admitting the child nowadays. Ration cards, voter IDs, pan cards all need proper documentation before validation. You cannot just claim to be a family unit by calling anyone your wife!

And of course, the second wife is NEVER granted any rights. So nothing is great about being a keep to a married man and bearing his child. Apart from the moral questions, there are several legal issues and immense insecurity for both the mother and the child. The BV CVs are showing it as a celebratory thing and I hate them for distorting the hard reality out there for such relationships .🤢