Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!

Scanned Judgements…!

Checking relevance for Revanasiddappa VS Mallikarjun...

Revanasiddappa VS Mallikarjun - 2011 0 Supreme(SC) 345 : The legal documents establish that an illegitimate child does not have rights in ancestral (coparcenary) property by birth and cannot claim a share in the grandfather''''s coparcenary property. While such a child may succeed to the self-acquired property of their father (including through survivorship), they do not acquire any interest in the father''''s ancestral property by birth and cannot demand partition during the father''''s lifetime. The Privy Council and Supreme Court rulings cited indicate that an illegitimate son of a Sudra from a permanent concubine is entitled to succeed to his father''''s self-acquired property and may inherit by survivorship, but has no right by birth in the joint family or ancestral property. Therefore, an illegitimate child has no rights in the grandfather''''s coparcenary property.Checking relevance for Krishnakumari Thampuran VS Palace Administration Board...

Checking relevance for Pavitri VS Katheesumma...

Pavitri VS Katheesumma - 1959 0 Supreme(Ker) 8 : Under Mohammadan law, an illegitimate child does not inherit property from its putative father or his relations, including the grandfather, and therefore has no rights in the grandfather''''s property. The court held that illegitimacy is not recognized under Islamic law, and an illegitimate child is not entitled to claim maintenance or inheritance from the assets of the putative father or his heirs, apart from any rights conferred by statute.Checking relevance for Rohit Shekhar VS N. D. Tiwari...

Rohit Shekhar VS N. D. Tiwari - 2010 0 Supreme(Ker) 1004 : An illegitimate child has rights to maintenance from the father''''s estate under Section 22 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, which states that the heirs of a deceased Hindu are bound to maintain the dependants of the deceased out of the estate inherited by them. Specifically, Section 21(8) and (9) define ''''dependants'''' to include a minor illegitimate son or an unmarried illegitimate daughter, meaning such a child is entitled to maintenance from the father''''s estate, including property inherited by the heirs. Therefore, an illegitimate child does have rights in the grandfather''''s property if it is part of the estate of the deceased father, as the child is recognized as a dependant under the law.Checking relevance for Sreejith Alias Abhilash S/o.M.P. Leela, (Minor) Vs Chalilparambath Radha, (Died) W/o. Deceased Radhakrishnan...

Sreejith Alias Abhilash S/o.M.P. Leela, (Minor) Vs Chalilparambath Radha, (Died) W/o. Deceased Radhakrishnan - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 884 : An illegitimate child is entitled to inherit from his father and grandfather under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, provided the marriage between the parents was established. The court held that the 9th defendant, an illegitimate son, was entitled to a share in both the self-acquired property of his father, Radhakrishnan, and the property inherited from his grandfather, Kunhiraman, because the marriage between Radhakrishnan and Leela was established.Checking relevance for Jane Antony VS V. M. Siyath...

Jane Antony VS V. M. Siyath - 2008 0 Supreme(Ker) 506 : The legal documents establish that children born to parents who lived together as husband and wife for a considerable period, even if not formally married, may be presumed legitimate and entitled to inherit the property of their parents. Specifically, the Supreme Court held in Vidhyadhari and Others v. Sukhrana Bai that children born to a man and woman who cohabited for a long time and were regarded as husband and wife are legitimate and entitled to a share in the service benefits of their father. The Court further stated that such children, though born in a prohibited relationship, are to be presumed legitimate and entitled to inherit the properties of their parents. The documents also suggest that Parliament should enact legislation to confer the right of succession on all illegitimate children irrespective of religion, in line with Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., which treats all children equally for maintenance. Therefore, an illegitimate child who was born to parents living as husband and wife is not without rights in the grandfather''''s property; such a child may be entitled to inherit if the presumption of legitimacy applies.

Illegitimate Child's Rights in Grandfather's Property

• No Rights to Paraveni Property: According to Sri Lankan law (Perera's Edition, p.8, section 7; UKKU v. HORATHALA), illegitimate children generally have no rights to their paternal grandfather's paraveni property, especially if they cannot inherit from their father or collateral sources. The law recommends explicitly excluding illegitimate children from inheritance rights in such cases.

• Inheritance of Acquired Property: Under Kandyan Law, illegitimate children may succeed to their father's acquired property if there are no legitimate children or widow (RANHAMI v. MENIK ETANA, ASIRVATHAM v. GUNARATNE). They can inherit equally with legitimate children in the absence of other heirs, but their rights are limited during the lifetime of the deceased (DINGIRI v. UNDIYA).

• Legal Limitations and Conditions: Illegitimate children cannot assert property rights during their father's lifetime (SRI00000041193). Their inheritance rights are generally recognized only through inheritance after the death of the owner, and they cannot claim rights in paraveni or ancestral property if the law explicitly excludes them (WIMALAWATHIE v. PUNCHI BANDA, UKKU v. HORATHALA).

• Specific Cases and Law Provisions:

• Under Kandyan Law, illegitimate children do not inherit their father's paraveni property if the father was married in binna or if the child was born out of unauthorized intercourse (ASIRVATHAM v. GUNARATNE, RAN MENIKA v. NANDOHAMY et al.).
• When the deceased leaves no legitimate heirs, illegitimate children may succeed to acquired property but are excluded from paraveni property rights, especially if the father was married in binna (WIMALAWATHIE v. PUNCHI BANDA).

Analysis and Conclusion

• Main Points: Illegitimate children generally lack rights to paternal or grandparental paraveni property, especially if they cannot prove paternity or if the property is classified as paraveni. They may succeed in inheriting acquired property under certain conditions, primarily when no legitimate heirs exist, but their rights are limited during the lifetime of the owner.

• Insights: The legal framework emphasizes the distinction between paraveni and acquired property, with illegitimate children being barred from inheritance in the former but potentially entitled to the latter under specific circumstances. The law also underscores the importance of acknowledgment and registration of paternity for inheritance rights.

• References:

• Perera's Edition, Armour (p.8, sec.7) UKKU v. HORATHALA
• Kandyan Law principles (RANHAMI v. MENIK ETANA, ASIRVATHAM v. GUNARATNE, RAN MENIKA v. NANDOHAMY et al.)
• Court rulings on inheritance limitations for illegitimate children (SRI00000041193, WIMALAWATHIE v. PUNCHI BANDA, DINGIRI v. UNDIYA)

Summary: Illegitimate children generally have no rights to their grandfather's paraveni property, but they may inherit acquired property under specific legal conditions, primarily when no legitimate heirs are present. Their rights are significantly restricted during the lifetime of the deceased and depend on acknowledgment and legal recognition of paternity.