Property Belongs To Whom?

What the son did wasn't correct. What he's expecting is also wrong. But what the daughter is doing is completely wrong. It's like saying to the roommate - I will clean the house, so you pay the rent.

Agreed the daughters took good care of dad and continue to do that for mom. But to just keep harping on that and expecting to be rewarded for it is something else. They did it for their parents. Now they're angry with the son for not chipping in and want to give it back by usurping the property? How is that justified?
If he hasn't helped them, tomorrow he will also need some help. Let them not stand up for him. But why do they want to financially distress his kin?

Moreover, when the building was being constructed, there was an inherent intention to live there from the son. Why did the daughters not stop him then? What did they think, that in future he will slice the building out and share the land with them? If they wanted to have a hold on their share, they couldn't have allowed the son to construct the house when he explicitly mentioned he'd like to settle down there in the future.

All of them should take whatever they are legally entitled to and be happy.

Appreciate your Fil and family for supporting the old lady in her tough times. May God Bless all of you.

 

Buildings in real estate is called a depreciating asset. Its the land that matters. One cannot build a house and claim the land its on . Does not work that way. What the son could have done with the money is completely a hypothetical situation. Courts dont care a squat. And when we sell property its almost always the land the buyer is interested in.
In the absence of a will the property has to be divided 4 ways. The mother can use her share during her lifetime esp for long term health care and later will it anyone she chooses.

Long term health care towards the end especially is expensive(in the case of the dad and in future the mother) . In the absence of the one daughter who seems to be handling it (nurse maid etc) the cost will come out of the property sale.

 

OP, from your post i doubt your SIL intention as moving into the house and then remodelling her with her money means that she is going to live in the house as long as she wants (may be lifelong) and that sends a message that house is hers now.....if since starting her intention was not of property share than she could have made it clear to her brother that i dont want share in the property....claiming a share is not bad.....but here it seems your SIL wants the whole house to her as she thinks that brother is out of india hence why does he need the house and moreover she is the one who is taking care of parents....i find brother's anger justified....
putting money into house for construction or remodelling give a signal that person is looking forward to own the house...

in this case what is the stance of mother???she can take the lead and solve the matter....

and moreover just because mother wants to live in that house, so just fulfilling the mother's wish, whole family shifting there sounds a little bit over the top and too selfless to be true...besides its illogical for the whole family to move there just because mother wants to live there.....if she is comfortable in her daughter's flat , she can continue liviing there....or she can move into apartment which her son is buying or she can move alone in the house....and if she wants live in her home only , that too with her daughter family then she should put her foot down and tell to her son that i want this and after her everybody can take share in the house.....

 

I totally agree that the son is wrong. He is not being sane. But this is not how they should give it back. JMO. She can always look for a place closeby and live there, comfortable for both her families and herself. No need to ask for property shares.

Coming to property division, everything is considered as in the bank deposits, gold, insurance, movable and immovable property in total. And that is divided into 4 (in this case) according to whatever is agreeable to all the parties.

 

If the son has spent all the money to build the house, he has the moral right over the building. The land value shall be evaluated as per market rate, and the son has to pay his sisters with a cash equivalent of their respective share of land. The mother should continue to live there, and the son shall take care of his mother's need, as well as take the complete ownership of the property, both land and building. While paying the cash to his sisters, he shall deduct his own monetary contributions if any, towards the dowry when they got married. This is my sense of justice.

It is unfair on the sister's part to take dowry as well as to claim property share. When the issue goes to court of law, the sisters will get equal property share as the court wont recognize dowry, some sisters are playing with this putting their brothers at economic disadvantage; Morally, it is not acceptable.

 

Hi OP,

I feel daughter's intention is to ask property only and she is just covering the scenario in the name of taking her of mother and her inlaws very well support this. If she really want to take care of mom, that can be done in any way. No need of remodeling dramas and all.

And ur FIL expects the DIL to talk abt this to son, in the same way he can talk to Son in laws also to give the value of the building to son. How come Son in laws are not keeping innocent face here. What are there views?
If they are ready to take the value of land from BIL or ready to pay the building worth to son, then the problem solved. But I don't think the daughters will give single rupee to son in any situation. They will continue this taking care drama only for whole time. daughters want share on there father's ppropety. How about his brother's earning? He has all the rights to fight for that.

This case needs real neutral ones who neither support son nor support daughter. I am sorry to say that you and ur family are completely supporting daughter's side and definitely u guys are not third/medium party to solve the issue.