What is the Position of Coparceners before Partition of a Joint Hindu Family?

The Privy Council pointed out that the family had become divided in 1834 itself and could not be treated as a joint family thereafter. The Privy Council observed: “According to the true notion of an undivided family in Hindu Law, no individual member of the family while it remains undivided, can predicate of the joint and undivided property, that he, that particular member, has a certain definite share”.

The effect of the arrangement of 1834 was to enable each member to claim a definite and certain share although some of the properties had not been actually severed and divided. So it operated as a partition and the joint family had become divided. The plaintiff’s claim was accordingly rejected.

Related Articles

Essay on the Guardianship of Minor under Muslim Law in India

“The guardianship of person in relation to a child belongs primarily to its father, the mother’s being only a pre-emptive right to keep the father away for a legally prescribed period only from a particular aspect of guardianship of person, namely, the custody and physical upbringing of the child”. It may be said therefore, that […]
Read more

Section 434 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Explained!

The section requires commission of mischief by destroying or moving a land-mark fixed by the authority of a public servant, or by any act which renders such land-mark less useful as such. Whereas the preceding section deals with similar offence with respect to light-house or a sea-mark, the present section deals with land-marks. Since the […]
Read more
Search for: