Kindly clarify whether it is self acquired or ancestral property 

2) daughter can file suit to set aside sale of land 

3) delay of 16 years in filing suit has to be explained by daughter 

If it is ancestral property and sold before 2005 daughter had no share in said property prior to 2005 

- An ancestral land cannot sold without the consent of all legal heirs including daughters . 

- If the family partition deed is registered , then daughter not having right to claim 

- Since the said property already sold before 2005 i.e. early to latest judgments of Supreme Court then she cannot claim right over the same. 

Daughter can get the sale deed executed in 2005 cancelled by the Court. The partition  in 2007 is invalid and unjust as the property sold in 2005 without consent of daughter is not included in the partition. Issue lawyer’s notice  to all legal heirs seeking reopening partition  executed in 2007 and separate possession of property. After that file a suit in district Court for partition and separate possession. In the suit add the purchaser of property in 2005 as party to the suit, obtain certified copy of sale deed of 2005 from the office of Sub-Registrar and file the same in the Court. Claim that the you did not sign the sale deed of 2005 and your signature is forged by brother.  The sale deed will be cancelled and you will get share in the sold land and other properties.  

If the properties were partitioned before 2005 excluding the daughters from allotment  of any share in the property, if it is an ancestral property then it cannot be reopened at this moment.

However if was the property of the father who is reported to have died intestate then the properties left behind by him shall devolve equally on all his legal heirs, in that case the daughters can claim their share in the property even at this stage ignoring the fact tht the properties were sold or partitioned later on.

If the properties were partitioned before 2005 excluding the daughters from allotment  of any share in the property, if it is an ancestral property then it cannot be reopened at this moment.

Any case may not be maintainable however without knowing proper details, no proper opinion can be rendered beyond this. 

Hence you may better consult a local lawyer with all relevant documents to get a more proper opinion  and suggestions for getting relief through court of law.

1. If the ancestral property had been sold or partitioned by way of registration of the property in the jurisdictional Sub Registrar's Office on or before 20th December 2004, then the daughter can't claim equal right over the property now. However, even before 20th December 2004 if the ancestral property had been sold, the daughter was still entitled to notional partition.

2.  Based on above, you can decide about future course of action, as deemed fit.

Daughter signature is not necessary 

1. Yes, the daughters can claim the right on the said sold land and file a suit praying for cancelling the said sale deed of the said land.

2. Since limitation period is 12 years in this case, it will have to be shown/claimed by the daughters that they came to know about the sale recently.

1.Ancestral property is defined differently.

2. It could be paternal property.

1. Even before the amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 in 2005 came into being, a daughter was entitled to notional share and not equal share on par with sons in the ancestral property.

2. There's no need to obtain daughter's signature if you are planning to buy the land in which the earlier sale deed was executed and registered on [deleted] ( Twenty Ninth March Two Thousand Four).

3. However this should not be construed as legal opinion as the documents related to the property in question are not scrutinised and it  was answered based on your question only.

1.  Ancestral property is defined as the property title of which has flown for 44 generations without any interruptions like s deed of conveyance/will/court order etc. 

2. If the land was ancestral amd was sold before 2005 then the daughters won't have any claim on the same now.

Your point number one above clearly indicates that the daughters were not entitled to a share in the properties sold before 2005, however subsequently the daughters have got their shares in the remaining properties by a family partition in the year 2007 as per the latest amendment of law in this regard i the year 2005.  

Therefore you can very well go ahead with your proposal to buy the property which was sold in the year 2004 without involving the daughters' signatures provided you obtain a proper legal opinion from a local lawyer on all other aspects. 

Yes the daughter has a share.

The daughters have a share.

1. This is tantamount to forgery, for which the daughter can file a criminal complaint to get FIR registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC.

2. She will also have to file a civil suit for declaration to declare the sale deed executed by her brothers as void and seek her share in the land. However, the limitation period to file the suit is 12 years from the date of transaction or knowledge, whichever is later.

3. It is not clear on what basis you are saying the land is ancestral. Hope you are aware of the concept of ancestral land.

4. The title is not defective in the hands of brothers as the signature of daughter is present on the sale deed albeit it is forged. Unless it is declared void by the competent court the sale deed is valid.

Dear Sir,

1) SC held "The protection of rights of daughters as coparcener is envisaged in the substituted Section 6 of the Act of 1956 recognizes the partition brought about by a decree of a court or effected by a registered instrument. The partition so effected before 20.12.2004 is saved."

2) The sale of property that took place before the date above is not covered under the retrospective effect of said clause, thus no the daughter has no claim to that sold property or to contest such sale now.

Thank you

1) 29.03.2004- Sale deed is valid.

2) 04.06.2007 - partition deed is also correct. No need of mention of 2004.

-    Daughters were not entitled to a share in the properties sold before 2005.

-    However the daughters have got their right in shares in the remaining properties by a family partition.

So you can go ahead to buy the property which was sold in the year 2004 but verify the papers with a local lawyer.

Dear Sir

You can purchase but the daughters can file a formal suit which may run for 4 to 5 years without any result. Please be informed that you are purchasing not only the property but also litigation.

- As per law, now a daughter whether married or unmarried is having equal share in the Ancestral property i.e.  an equal share in such a property accrues by birth itself. Before 2005, only sons had a share in such property. 

- Since, before 2005 , only sons share was in the ancestral property , then the signature of daughter was not needed at the time of selling to buyer. 

- Hence, that land is legal and cannot be claimed by daughter under the new judgment of Supreme Court.