A Gift Later Claimed to be a Loan

The father-in-law gave his son-in-law and daughter a larger apartment instead of their small one and appointed his son to handle the sale and purchase, giving it without conditions. Many years later, the father-in-law passed away, leaving a will to divide his property equally among everyone. Now the brother-in-law claims that the difference between the apartments was an investment or a loan. The daughter and son-in-law were told nothing all these years, neither verbally nor in writing. What is the ruling?

Hello 

It is not possible to answer the question without hearing the arguments of the parties. 

Nevertheless, to expand knowledge on the subject, I will attach what one of the rabbis of the Beit Hora'a wrote on this matter:

Assuming that the larger apartment [given instead of the smaller apartment] was registered in the names of the recipients, they received the apartment as a gift. The maximum that could be is that the giver intended for them to pay for the additional apartment they received, meaning it is not a gift but a kind of sale. However, in such a case, the recipients are certainly holding the money, and due to doubt, they do not need to pay, see Ketzot HaChoshen, siman 79, sk. 2.

I wrote the above simply, but in truth, there is an expansion of matters, and there are opinions that suggest the father gave the money added to the more expensive apartment as a loan. Nevertheless, we have not removed the doubt, and if the inheritance has not yet been divided, it is possible that other heirs will hold. However, there can be various distinctions in this. I suggest the parties arrange a meeting together before the Beit Hora'a to clarify the matter.

An article on this subject is attached.