Property Belongs To Whom?

no re-modeling.period.until things sorted out.Actually it's not advisable to touch the property until things settle down.It's very healthy to let live mother in that house with help of some one and give time to everyone and also to mom.Mom shouldn't get influenced by people around her.She should able to think through and put her foot down in good state of mind.

And also daughters shouldn't extend there hand without there capacity.Only extend the hand into there ability and capacity.If they can't do something and just say it - and all the kids should decide and do the best.Just don't take single handy all the burden and slip other siblings away from there responsibility.If it's much burden on you - just spill it out.

 

AN

@SeekingMind : Scenarios where the siblings refuse to vacate houses is a reality. It is unfortunate that the mother's wish of staying in her house is not fulfilled. But the son's fears are not unfounded from the sister's attitude right now. She is claiming equal rights on the house and getting it remodeled - when she is as yet outside the house and a claimant to only a quarter share. In India getting a house vacated is next to impossible. From what I have understood from your posts the sister is neither simple nor easy. The sister once gets inside the house will be extremely difficult to evict. What if she or better her husband or son in the future refuse to leave the house in the future? Those people who condemn the son today for keeping his mother out of the house today - will the same people be able to get the son even his quarter share tomorrow? I doubt. Which relative would intervene and risk bad blood with the son in law? And would the son be able to come from India to fight a protracted legal battle?

What about the other sister in US? Does she not have a responsibility? When daughters claim equal rights over parents property, do they not have equal responsibilities for their parents - both financially and physically? Is all love only for money? Why does nobody talk of her irresponsibility of leaving the parents in India? Why are she and her husband not dragged over coals for absolving themselves from their duties? She will gain equally from the legal division of assets. Here we are talking of a moral division - not a legal division. She is as much a part of it as the brother and the sister in India.

 

Yes legally...because the son was stupid enough to trust his money to his father.Because the son wanted to build a home where he could live with his parents.

Morally father had no right to leave no will or want the house for everyone when he had let the son invest his hard earned money on the land.

As for the sister...she doesn't look any less of an opportunist.
Why the precondition to remodel if the intention is to care for mother.why can't she just live in the house as a guest without any remodeling?

Even she has no right to make permanent changes to the property without permission from other heirs.
...............................................................................
I hope this is a lesson for people.
Never invest money in joint property. It never does any good. Neither for them...nor for the family.
If you do invest in joint property ,write it off as a loss and don't expect anything for it.
If you want to give your parents security of a home, buy the best you can and keep it n your name.Let your parents enjoy it in their life time .
Property bought on your name is still security for your parents.
Property bought in parents name is head ache for you.

 

@SeekingMind : Please read my posts entirely - I am myself saying that as per law not only the house, everything that the father owned as per law will be divided into 4 parts. That is as per Hindu Succession Act. Please check it online.

But this division is of 1/4 of the property not one floor of it. And the daughter should introspect as to why she wants to stay in 1 floor. She should go to court, sell off all the assets and then divide it into 4 coz I doubt that the land can be divided into 4 useful parts. I have a sneaky feeling that the division of assets is in lieu of the services rendered to the parents. It is legal - but not ethical. And why has the son in law done a favor by letting his wife take care of her parents? Nobody is supposed to be grateful to the DIL for letting the DS take care of ILs. Thats her job. When we are talking of the law let us stick to the law. Please check Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 where daughters are also liable to take care of their parents physically and financially. And why not talk of the other daughter? Why is she not in the picture - law says she is.

When talking of Social conventions, thats a different ballgame altogether. Please separate the legal, conventional and moralistic grounds from each other and do not try to justify one the grounds of the other. And please read all the responses carefully. Everybody in unison is saying that the daughter is entitled to a quarter of the father's estate as per law. Just dont use the law to justify the sister's demands on moralistic grounds as there are none in my view. And she is a cousin SIL to you. Just take a chill pill and let her take her own decisions and fight her own battles. Nobody comes out unscathed of this mess.

 

@yellowmango : you nailed it.