- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
UI seek advice regarding an issue related to shared land ownership. The total land measures 360 feet in length and has a 60-foot-wide frontage along the road. I own one-third of this land, while my brother owns the remaining two-thirds.
My brother proposes a partition in which I would receive a portion with 20 feet of road frontage and 360 feet in depth. However, I am concerned that such a narrow frontage would render my share impractical or unusable for agricultural purposes (the land is registered as agricultural land).
I have no issues to maintaining the land as shared land in the near future also. However, I would like to understand, if my brother decides to take the matter to court, would the court consider a 20-foot frontage to be fair and equitable? Is it possible that the court may instead direct a partition providing me with a slightly wider frontage—such as 30 feet—for practical use? Alternatively, would the court consider ordering the sale of the land and division of the value after selling the land?
-
ACourt with take decades to settle this matter plus lakhs in lawyer costs.
Sit amicably and settle for distribution. Frankly with his two thirds share his 40 foot road facing seems fair and neutral. U try for 25 to 30 foot frontage with area adjusted for one third the share u own. Plus u could pay extra for front facing footage. Since it is agricultural u could distribute it such that u have an access road till the back and square equivalent till the end for your stake.
U have to decide and come to a decision amicabley.
-
-
