We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Please join us for this wonderful occasion where we re-write the sources of law and their hierarchy. Now, it is as follows:
1. This guy's senior, who is a designated counsel, fam prop law, estates.
2. Statutes
3. Case law
4. Customary law
Please spread the message! I had been looking at the wrong sources of law my entire life!
No.
The necessary implication is, that a property must remain intact for four bloodline generations, which means, if your father inherits property from his grand father's father's self acquired property, it becomes ancestral in nature. Whether it is a coparcenory or not would depend on the HUF agreements etc., in the absence of which, it is necessarly owned by 4 generations till your father's great-grandfather dies (karta), when you will also automatically own an equal share.