Right Of A Son In His Father's Property

Property disputes within families often revolve around a key question: What right does a son have in his father's property? In India, this issue is not just a matter of custom or emotion—it is governed by a complex framework of personal laws, statutory enactments, and judicial precedents. With changing societal values and significant legal reforms, especially the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, the traditional understanding of inheritance has undergone a transformation.

This blog offers a comprehensive guide to the legal rights of a son in both ancestral and self-acquired property of his father. From understanding the role of the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) to analyzing case laws that interpret a son's entitlement, we break down:

• The distinction between ancestral and self-acquired property
• The impact of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005
• A son's right if the father dies with or without a will
• Whether a father can legally disinherit a son
• Landmark Supreme Court judgments that have shaped the law

Whether you're facing an inheritance conflict or simply want clarity on your rights under Indian law, this article will equip you with the legal knowledge you need.

The Legal Framework Governing Inheritance in India

Inheritance laws in India are deeply influenced by personal laws and statutory provisions. Each religion has its own succession principles, but for Hindus, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 remains the cornerstone legislation.

Role of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, governs the intestate succession among Hindus, including Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs. Under this Act, a son is recognized as a Class I legal heir. If the father passes away without making a will, the son is entitled to an equal share in the father's property along with other Class I heirs such as the widow, daughter, and mother of the deceased.

The Act also draws a crucial distinction between ancestral and self-acquired property. In ancestral property, the son acquires an undivided share by birth. This means that he becomes a coparcener in the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) and has the right to demand partition at any time. On the other hand, in the case of self-acquired property, the father has full discretion over its disposition. He may choose to gift it, will it away, or sell it as he pleases. The son has no inherent right in self-acquired property during the father’s lifetime unless the father dies intestate, in which case the property is distributed among all Class I heirs.

Key Provisions of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005

The 2005 amendment brought a landmark change by giving daughters equal rights as sons in ancestral property, thereby promoting gender equality.

Impact on sons:

• Sons retain their coparcenary rights by birth in ancestral property under a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF).
• Sons and daughters now have equal rights, liabilities, and duties with regard to ancestral property.
• The amendment did not dilute a son's rights; rather, it ensured daughters also enjoy parity in inheritance matters.

This means that a son can claim his rightful share in HUF property, but he must now share it equally with his daughters.

Applicability in Different Religions

Inheritance laws in India vary significantly based on religion:

• Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs: Governed by the Hindu Succession Act, including the 2005 amendment.
• Muslims: Governed by personal law (Sharia). Sons receive a fixed share in both ancestral and self-acquired property. The concept of coparcenary or HUF doesn’t apply.
• Christians and Parsis are governed by the Indian Succession Act, 1925, where sons and daughters typically inherit equally if there is no will.

This makes it essential to understand the personal law applicable based on religion before determining inheritance rights.

Rights of a Son in His Father's Property

The rights of a son in his father’s property are largely determined by the nature of the property—whether it is ancestral or self-acquired. This section focuses on the son’s legal entitlement to ancestral property, which is often the source of disputes within joint families.

Rights in Ancestral Property

Under Hindu law, ancestral property is the property that passes undivided down four generations of the male lineage, without any interruption through a will or gift. It includes property inherited by the father from his father, grandfather, or great-grandfather.

Coparcenary Rights by Birth

A son acquires coparcenary rights by birth in ancestral property. This means he is not merely an heir but a coparcener in the Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) structure. As a coparcener, he:

• Has a right to demand partition of the ancestral property
• Is entitled to an equal share along with other coparceners
• Can claim his share even during the lifetime of his father

These rights arise automatically and cannot be denied unless legally disqualified under specific grounds like civil death, renunciation, or proven misconduct.

Equal Share Among Sons and Daughters Post-2005 Amendment

Before 2005, only sons were considered coparceners in a HUF. However, the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 changed the legal landscape by granting equal coparcenary rights to daughters as well.

Now, both sons and daughters:

• Acquire coparcenary rights by birth
• Have the same legal share and responsibilities
• Can file for the partition and maintenance of ancestral property

This amendment did not reduce a son's rights—it merely ensured daughters enjoy the same legal standing.

Role of Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)

The concept of HUF plays a crucial role in determining a son’s right in ancestral property. An HUF is a legal entity recognized under Hindu law comprising a common ancestor and all his lineal male descendants (and now daughters too, post-2005).

The ancestral property belongs to the HUF as a whole, and no individual member can claim ownership of any specific part unless a partition is carried out. A son, as a coparcener, holds a joint interest in the entire HUF property along with other members.

In case of partition, each coparcener (including the son) is entitled to receive an equal share. After partition, the son’s share becomes self-acquired, and he can will it away as he deems fit.

Can a Father Legally Disinherit a Son from Ancestral Property?

The short answer is no, a father cannot disinherit his son from ancestral property. Since a son acquires a birthright, the father has no legal authority to deny or revoke this right unilaterally.

However, there are some exceptional situations where disinheritance is legally permissible:

• If the property is self-acquired, the father may choose not to leave anything to the son through a will.
• If the son has been legally disqualified (e.g., has committed murder against a family member or converted religion against family norms in certain sects), the court may bar inheritance.

In all other cases, a son’s share in ancestral property is protected by law, and any attempt by the father to disinherit him can be challenged in court.

Rights in Self-Acquired Property

• Unlike ancestral property, where a son has a birthright, the legal position regarding self-acquired property is very different. In self-acquired property, the father has complete ownership and control, and a son has no automatic legal claim during the father’s lifetime.
• A father can buy, sell, transfer, gift, or will his self-acquired property to anyone he wishes—including outsiders, friends, charities, or one particular child, without needing consent from his son or other family members. This legal freedom is rooted in the principle that self-acquired property is not governed by the rules of coparcenary inheritance.
• If a father chooses to write a will, he can exclude his son entirely from inheriting his self-acquired property, and such a will is considered valid under Indian succession laws.
• However, if the father dies intestate (i.e., without making a will), the son becomes a Class I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, and is entitled to an equal share along with other legal heirs such as the mother, daughter, and widow of the deceased.

In summary, a son has no birthright or guaranteed share in his father’s self-acquired property. His right arises only after the father’s death and only if no valid will exists. Therefore, while sons may inherit self-acquired property, it is entirely contingent on the presence or absence of a will and the father's intentions during his lifetime.

What Happens If The Father Dies Without A Will?

When a father passes away without executing a will, the property is said to be inherited through intestate succession. In such cases, the distribution of his assets is governed by the applicable personal law. For Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, comes into play. According to this Act, the property of the deceased is distributed among Class I legal heirs, which includes the son, daughter, widow, and mother of the deceased, among others. All Class I heirs inherit equally, regardless of gender. Therefore, if a Hindu father dies intestate, his son is legally entitled to an equal share in the father’s self-acquired property, along with the other surviving Class I heirs. In the case of ancestral property, the son's rights are already established by birth, so intestate succession does not affect his share. However, in the absence of a will, property division must be legally administered, often through a court-supervised partition or mutual family arrangement. For other religions, such as Christianity, Islam, or Zoroastrianism, inheritance without a will is guided by their respective personal laws. Sons under Muslim law receive a fixed share, typically double that of daughters, whereas Christian and Parsi laws usually promote equal distribution among all children. In all cases, having legal documentation, such as a legal heir certificate or succession certificate, may be required to claim the rightful share when no will exists.

What If There Is A Will?

If a father dies, leaving behind a valid will, the inheritance of his property follows the terms laid out in that will, rather than the rules of intestate succession. In such cases, the father has full discretion over the distribution of his self-acquired property and can choose to bequeath it to any person of his choice, including someone outside the family. The son, in this situation, does not have an automatic right to challenge the father's wishes unless there is a legal basis such as fraud, coercion, or lack of testamentary capacity. For ancestral property, however, a will cannot override a son’s inherent right. A father cannot use a will to unjustly deprive his son of his birthright share in ancestral property. If such an attempt is made, it can be contested in court and may be declared invalid to the extent that it violates the legal rights of the coparceners. In cases where a will exists, the nominated heirs must go through a probate process (especially in cities like Mumbai, Kolkata, and Chennai) to get the will legally validated by a court. This process confirms the authenticity of the will and grants authority to the executor to distribute the estate as per the deceased’s wishes. Thus, while a will offers clarity and reduces disputes, it must be legally valid, free from coercion, and executed in accordance with the Indian Succession Act (or relevant personal laws) to be enforceable.

Case Law

To understand the legal position more clearly, here are some landmark case laws that have helped shape the interpretation of a son’s right in his father’s property in India. These judicial precedents provide valuable insights into how courts have applied succession laws over time.

Vineeta Sharma vs. Rakesh Sharma (2020)

• Fact: Daughters and sons of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) claimed equal rights to coparcenary property. There was a question on whether daughters have the same birthright as sons, especially if the father died before the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act.
• What is Held: In the case of Vineeta Sharma vs. Rakesh Sharma (2020) Supreme Court held that daughters have the same rights as sons in coparcenary property by birth, irrespective of whether the father was alive at the time of the 2005 amendment. Both sons and daughters have equal inheritance rights in ancestral property.

Landmark Bengaluru Property Dispute (Supreme Court, Apr 22, 2025)

• Fact: After the partition of the joint family property, a father sold property inherited from his own father (the children’s grandfather) without his children’s consent. The sons claimed an automatic right, arguing it remained ancestral.
• What is Held: The Supreme Court ruled that after partition, the property received becomes the self-acquired property of the recipient (the father). The sons do not have an automatic right to claim such property as joint family property by birth. The father could freely sell, transfer, or bequeath it without the sons’ consent.

Uttam vs. Subagh Singh (2016)

• Fact: The dispute was whether property inherited by a son from his father retains its status as ancestral property (allowing further birthright claims by his sons) or becomes self-acquired.
• What is Held: In the case of Uttam vs. Subagh Singh (2016), the Supreme Court held that after partition or division, the property inherited by a son from his father ceases to be ancestral and becomes his self-acquired property. The son’s children, therefore, do not have a birthright claim once partition is effected.

Roxann Sharma vs. Arun Sharma (2015)

• Fact: A custody battle: the father sought custody rights to a young child (a son), arguing for his paternal rights under personal law.
• What is Held: In the case of Roxann Sharma vs. Arun Sharma (2015) Supreme Court held that there is no automatic right for a father to have custody of a minor son. Welfare of the child is paramount, the mother normally has custody of children under five unless proven otherwise. The son does not have an automatic right to live with the father solely by virtue of being a son.

Conclusion

The right of a son in his father's property is a deeply rooted yet legally nuanced aspect of Indian inheritance law. While sons enjoy birthrights in ancestral property under Hindu law, they have no automatic claim over self-acquired property unless the father dies intestate. The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, further established legal equality between sons and daughters, reshaping the traditional inheritance framework.

Through landmark judgments such as Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma and Uttam v. Subagh Singh, the Supreme Court has clarified important questions surrounding partition, disinheritance, and the nature of property. Today, a son's rights depend not just on lineage but also on factors like property type, existence of a will, and the applicable personal law. In essence, understanding whether a property is ancestral or self-acquired, whether a will exists, and whether succession is guided by personal or statutory law is crucial. Sons do have significant rights, but those rights are defined, limited, and protected by law, not by assumption or tradition.

Disclaimer: This article is for general legal information only and should not be treated as legal advice. Property rights may vary based on individual facts and personal laws. For accurate guidance, consult a qualified Legal Expert.