A client dies without a will, leaving Rs 18 crore: a Rs 6 crore house, Rs 8 crore of shares and Rs 4 crore of deposits. His widow, two children and mother survive. Split the estate under the applicable succession framework and show where nominations do not decide ownership.

Each of the four heirs, widow, son, daughter and mother, takes Rs 4.5 crore: a quarter of the house, Rs 2 crore of shares and Rs 1 crore of deposits. The widow's nomination brings Rs 12 crore into her name, but she owns only Rs 3 crore of it and holds Rs 9 crore for the other three. The house, with no nominee, is co-owned by all four. Without a will, the law, not the family's wishes, decides the split.

A will is a letter telling the family what to do; without one, the state has a standard letter it sends to every family. Under the intestateDying without a valid will, so the estate passes under the succession law that applies to the person rather than under their own instructions. framework assumed here, the widow, the two children and the mother form the first class of heirs and share equally, a quarter each, Rs 4.5 crore. His brother takes nothing, because a first-class heir exists. Each heir's quarter is a quarter of every asset unless the family agrees otherwise: Rs 1.5 crore of the house, Rs 2 crore of shares and Rs 1 crore of deposits.

Delivery, not ownership. A courier who signs for a parcel addressed to a whole household does not own what is inside. The demat account and deposits are transmitted to the widow as nomineeThe person named to receive an account or policy on the holder's death, which on the framework assumed here makes them a custodian for the heirs rather than the owner., so Rs 12 crore arrives in her name, but on the framework assumed she owns only her quarter, Rs 3 crore, and holds Rs 9 crore for the son, daughter and mother. Nomination makes the bank and depository's job simple; it does not rewrite succession. The legal position on nominees has been argued in the courts, so this is the point to confirm with a lawyer first.

Three things, in order. First, record in writing what the widow holds for each heir, and either transfer those amounts or have the others formally give up their shares in her favour through a family settlement, with the tax and stamp duty treatment of each route confirmed. Second, the house: the widow lives there, and the family should agree in writing whether the others keep their quarters, are bought out, or relinquish them. Third, the mother's quarter. If she too dies without a will, her Rs 4.5 crore passes under her own succession, typically to her surviving children and the children of a child who died before her; on the facts here, illustratively, Rs 2.25 crore to Shrikant's brother and Rs 1.125 crore to each of Shrikant's children, and nothing to the widow.

That last point is what most families do not expect, and it is the adviser's opening. The widow and the mother should each make a will now, so the next transfer follows their wishes rather than the default. The limit to say plainly: the equal-shares answer rests on the personal law assumed; a different religion, a joint family property or a registered will somewhere in a drawer changes everything, so the first step is always to establish which law applies.