A dispute arose over agricultural land claimed to be ancestral by the plaintiffs, who sought to invalidate two transfer deeds executed in 2009. They contended that the property was inherited from forefathers and, therefore, could not be transferred exclusively to two of the sons.

The defendants argued that the property was self-acquired and that valid transfer deeds and a registered Will existed. The trial court, however, ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, declaring the land ancestral and setting aside the transfer deeds. On appeal, the lower appellate court reversed this decision, holding the property to be self-acquired.

The primary issue was whether land received by one generation through a decree from the previous generation qualifies as ancestral property under Hindu law. To be ancestral, it must be proven that the property descended from at least three generations — father, grandfather, and great- grandfather — in an unbroken lineage.

The Court noted that there was no evidence showing that the property held by the predecessor was inherited from his father. Referring to Paragraph 221 of Mulla’s Hindu Law (21st Edition), the Court emphasized that property inherited from a paternal ancestor is ancestral only when lineage up to the great-grandfather is established. Without such proof, the property remains self-acquired.

The Court upheld the appellate court’s view that the property in question was self-acquired. Consequently, the transfer deeds executed during the owner’s lifetime were valid. Finding no substantial question of law, the High Court dismissed the appeal.