ANSWER 1-

A. Rakesh died in 2004

According to the facts, the joint family property will devolve from Ram. The Class I heir of
Rakesh’s father, Ram are his wife and his sons that is Ram’s property is distributed to Vinita,
Rakesh and Mukesh. Priya will not get any share as the daughters or females do not inherit
any properties according to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. So, one- fourth property of Ram
after the division is ingerited to Rakesh. Now upon the death of Rakesh, the Class I heir of his
property are- his wife, Reena and his two sons, Ajay and Sameer. Megha is his daughter, thus
she is excluded from the inheritance of the property as prescribed by the law. Sahil is
disqualified as he murdered Raj. Now out of the one-fourth property of Rakesh, the property
will be divided between three people wherein each will get one-twelfth part of Rakesh’s
property.

Now, Praveen, son of Rubina and Ajay will be disqualified from inheriting the property of
any of his Hindu relative (here, the property is devolved from Ram, a Hindu) as he is a child
born after the conversion of his parents to another religion, therefore according to the Section
26 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Praveen cannot inherit the property concerned.
Therefore, the one-twelfth part of the property inherited by Ajay and Rubina will remain to
them only. Ayush, son of Esha and Sameer will not get the property from alleged father
according the Hindu Law as in 2004, the live-in relationships were not legalised and the child
born out of such relationships were not considered legitimate. Therefore, Ayush cannot
inherit the property of Sameer and Esha. Now, Punit, son of Raj will get the whole one-
twelfth property of Rakesh as he is the descendant of Raj.

Case Referred-
 Gurupad Khandappa Magdum v. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum
 CWT v. Chander Sen
 Pratibha Rani v. Suraj Kumar
 Bhagat Ram v. Teja Singh
 Vaddeboyina Tulasamma v.Vaddeboyina Sesha Redd
B. Rakesh died in 2021

The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was amended in 2005 and was named as The Hindu
Succeession (Amendment) Act, 2005. This amendment re-established the equality ensured
under the Constitution and the provisions granted the equal status to daughters as of the son
in a Joint Hindu Family. Now, according to the facts, the property will be devolved by Ram
wherein the property will be divided between 4 people as Class I heirs (as prescribed under
section 8 of the Act), Vinita, Priya, Rakesh and Mukesh. On the death of Rakesh, the
property will be divided between 5 people and Class I heir of Rakesh’s property will be
Reena, Ajay, Sameer, Megha. Sahil is disqualified as he murdered Raj. Now out of the one-
fourth property of Rakesh, the property will be divided in the ratio of one-twentieth part each
of Rakesh’s property.

Now, Praveen, son of Rubina and Ajay will be disqualified from inheriting the property of
any of his Hindu relative (here, the property is devolved from Ram, a Hindu) as he is a child
born after the conversion of his parents to another religion, therefore according to the Section
26 of the Hindu Succession Act, Praveen cannot inherit the property concerned. Therefore,
the one-twelfth part of the property inherited by Ajay and Rubina will remain to them only.
Ayush, son of Esha and Sameer will not get the property from alleged father. According the
Hindu Law, a child born out of a live-in relationship is not considered a legitimate heir of the
property of his father though he is entitled to maintenance and can also inherit the property
from his maternal side. Therefore, Ayush cannot inherit the property of Sameer and Esha.
Punit, son of Raj will get the whole one-twentieth part of the property of Rakesh as he is the
descendant of Raj.

Cases Referred-
 Omprakash v. Radhacharan, 2009
 Ganduri Koteshwaramma and Anr. v. Chakiri Yanadi and Anr.
 Prakash and Ors. v. Phulavati and Ors
 Dhannulal and Ors. v..Ganeshram and Ors.
 Uttam v. Saubhag Singh

ANSWER 2
HOW WOULD SAFEENA’S PROPERTY DEVOLVE IN 2011?

As regard to Sunni Muslim succession of property, they follow a per capita method of distribution in
which the left over estate is significantly divided among the heirs comprising both sharers and
residuary, and each share depends on the number of sharers. In this case, Safeena acquires a half of
that of the shares with that of her husband and those share after her death would devolve around as
follows as per the per capita scheme. Safeena dying intestate, has left behind her husband Nafees, one
daughter Salma, one granddaughter from the deceased son Tanaaz, her Mother and grandmother and a
full sister.

This illustrates as:

A sunni women dies leaving behind (a) husband (b) a daughter (c) son’s daughter (d) mother (e)
maternal grandmother and, (f) full sister

(a) Husband: husband received 1/4th of the share because of the presence of child (daughter)

(b) A daughter: a share of single daughter in the absence of son is 1/2

(c) Son’s daughter: the share of son’s daughter is 1/6 th because of the presence of a daughter

(d) Mother: the mother gets 1/3 of what remains after deducting the share of the husband, and if the
husband’s share is ¼ then mother’s share is 1/6 of (1-1/4) i.e. 1/6 of ¼ which amounts to 1/4

(e) Maternal grandmother: excluded from inheritance because of the presence of mother

(f) Full sister: excluded from inheritance because of the presence of daughter and a son’s daughter

Therefore, the shares are: ¼ + ½ + 1/6 + 1/4;

Taking the common denominator

Husband: 3/12

Daughter: 6/12

Son’s daughter: 2/12

Mother: 3/12

Therefore, the total shares amount to 14/12, which falls under the Doctrine of Aul, which is applied
when after the shares to the designated Sharers are allotted respectively but if the sum total exceeds its
unity this doctrine comes into play. In such cases the numerator is kept intact and the unity is
 increased with 2 to match the numerator and to exhaust the heritable property. This signifies that, the
quotas of the heritable property should be enhanced.

HOW WOULD NAFEES PROPERTY DEVOLVE?

As regard to Sunni law of inheritance, all the heirs of Nafees in this case are sharers and the shares are
assigned by the rules determined by the per capita scheme followed by the Sunni Muslims in
distribution of the property. As Sulaiman family are from Sunni sect the following way is adapted to
sharing of property. Totally there are four sharers; deceased second wife Sabera, grand-son Ahmed
from the deceased second wife son Akthar, daughter of the first wife Safeena and one grand-daughter
of his son from first wife Tanaaz. As in this case second wife Sabera has deceased here share will be
immersed into the total shares under the scheme and each of the person will receive share of the
property as per per capita division

A Sunni Muslim died leaving behind (a) daughter (b) son’s daughter and, (c) son’s son. In this case,
all the heirs are sharers.
1. Daughter: ½ of the shares
2. Son’s daughter: ¼ of the share, since there exists a son’s son 
3. Son’s son: ¼ of the share, since only there are two sharers, it shifts him from residuary to
sharer
Therefore, the shares are:  ½ + ¼+¼
Taking the common denominator as 4
Daughter: 2/4 
Son’s daughter: ¼
Son’s son: ¼ 
Which totals to 2/4+1/4+1/4 = 4/4 = 1 exhausts the property
Therefore, the total amount of shares over the property would be 3, where the daughter geing the
director shares receives half of the inheritance and the other two member being shifted from
residuaries to sharers, recived 1/4 of the property each.
th

ANSWER 3-

A. In a joint family, Karta is referred to as a manager of the joint family and its properties. He is
the one who takes care of all the expenses and protects the properties of the joint family and
look after the family. It is a presumption that an ordinary senior most male member is the
 Karta and if he dies, the next senior most male becomes the Karta. Generally females cannot
become Karta but in some exceptions, she can act as Karta in absence of adult male member
even though she is not a coparcener as held by the Nagpur High Court. However, in
Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Seth Govind Ram, the Supreme Court held that a female
member cannot alienate joint family property.

POWERS OF KARTA-

1) Managing Powers- As the Karta is the head of the family, he has the absolute managing
powers. For the benefit of the estate, he may manage the family property, affairs and business
the way he likes and is not questionable.
2) Right to Income- The income occurred out of the business or work done out of the joint
family property, the income must be handed over to the Karta, and it’s a rule. Allotment of
the funds and the fulfilment of the needs and requirements are upon the discretion of the
Karta and no member can ask for specific share in the income.
3) Representational Rights- Karta represents his family in all matters including, religious,
social and legal. He also has the power to enter into any transaction on behalf of the family
and his actions are binding on the entire family.
4) Power to Compromise- A Karta can compromise all disputes concerning the family property
and their management. However, if his actions are not bonafide, it can be challenged in a
partition.
5) Power to refer a dispute to arbitration- Karta has power to refer any suit or dispute to
arbitration and seek arbitrator’s award and this award is binding on the entire family.
6) Power to contract debts and of acknowledgement- Karta has power to acknowledge any debt
due or to pay debt or to make pack payment of debt on the behalf of the family. He can also
contract depts. For the family and such debts incurred in the course of business, are binding
on the family.
7) Power of Alienation- Nobody has the power to alienate joint family property except the
Karta under 3 circumstances-
 Benefit of estate
 Legal necessity
 Indispensable duties

LIABILITIES OF KARTA-
 Karta has tremendous powers same time his position is fiduciary and has part of duties and
liabilities.

1) Liable to keep up- Karta is obliged to keep up all the individuals from joint family. If he
inappropriately prohibits any member from the maintenance, he can be sued for maintenance
and also arrears of maintenance.
2) Rendering accounts liability- Karta is not supposed to keep accounts till the family remains
joint, but is liable to account for family property while partitioning. Any coparcener can sue
Karta if he is not satisfied with his account to discover if any misappropriation made by
Karta.
3) Liability to recover debts due- Not with bar by limitation but within reasonable time, Karta
should realize all due debts to the family.
4) Reasonable expenditure liability- Karta is the custodian of the surplus income, therefore, he
should spend money reasonably and for the purpose of the family.
5) Liability of non-alienation of coparcenary property- Without the consent of all the
coparceners, Karta cannot alienate joint family property unless it is for the benefit of the
estate, family or for necessity.

B. The legacy and division of property which is likewise considered as progression over the
property of Hindus and Muslims are administered by their individual laws. The distinctions
are broadly clarified here.

Hindu Law of Succession

Progression is a strategy for the exchange of property from one individual to other after the
demise of the previous. After freedom we have uniform common laws of progression for all
Hindus. The old Hindu Law and standard law of progression stand repealed. The particular
treatment of male over females has been impressively taken out with the codification of the
Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The law of progression can be arranged under two heads:

1) Testamentary Succession – The property (isolated, partitioned, unified) declines as indicated

by the "will" of an individual who has the responsibility for the property or interest in
something very similar. It manages the principles identifying with the devolution of the
property on relations just as others.
2) Intestate Succession – it depends on the guidelines which decide the mode of devolution of
the property of the expired on beneficiaries exclusively on the premise of their relationship
with the expired, when the individual passes on without making his will or confirmation.

Muslim Law of Succession

The property of an expired individual may decay either by testamentary or intestate

progression. Testamentary progression happens as indicated by the will furthermore,
confirmation of the perished. Intestate progression is considered legacy under which the
legitimate beneficiaries of the perished prevail to his property. The Islamic law of legacy
(non-testamentary progression), like the remainder of the Islamic Personal law is a mix of the
pre-Islamic traditions and the principles presented by the Prophet. Most of the Islamic law of
the legacy is established upon the Quran. After allowance of memorial service costs, costs of
getting Probate/Letters of Organization from the court, compensation for individual support
of the expired inside a quarter of a year of his passing, obligations, and inheritances, the
leftover property (both mobile and enduring) gets qualified to be acquired.

Comparative Analysis of Muslim and Hindu Law of Inheritance

1. In Muslim Law, all property is one and there is no differentiation between tribal or self-
procured or separate property, while in Hindu law there is isolated and self-procured
property.
2. There are no such things as joint family property in a Muslim family though; among Hindus
the idea of joint family property is predominant.
3. The privilege of a beneficiary, interestingly, appears on the passing of the progenitor.
Directly by birth is obscure in Muslim law yet in Hindu law directly in property is vested by
birth.
4. Muslim law doesn't perceive the principle of portrayal. The estate of the expired individual
declines upon his beneficiaries right at the moment of his demise. The estate vests promptly
in every beneficiary with respect to the offer gave by the Muslim law. As the premium of
every beneficiary is discrete and particular, one of various beneficiaries can't be treated as
addressing the others. Along these lines, if P's child R kicks the bucket in the lifetime of P the
child of R for example grandson of P can't guarantee his dad's offer as addressing him yet in
Hindu law the tenet of portrayal is perceived.
5. Muslim law doesn't perceive any interest hopeful on the passing of another for example spes
successionis (simple possibility of progression) while in Hindu law the tenet of spes
successionis is all around perceived.