The document explains the concept of coparcenary within Hindu law, which refers to joint ownership of property limited to males who inherit by birth. It contrasts the Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools of Hindu law in terms of property rights and inheritance, highlighting changes introduced by the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act of 2005 that granted equal rights to daughters in coparcenary property. The amendment reformed traditional patriarchal norms, allowing women to be treated equally within the family property context, while maintaining certain existing limitations regarding maternal shares.

1. COPARCENARY
-SHIVANI SHARMA
-ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
-SARDAR PATEL SUBHARTI INSTITUTE OF LAW

2. THECONCEPT
OF
COPARCENARY
 According to Collins Dictionary –
“a form of joint ownership of property, especially
joint heirship”
 'Coparcenary' is a narrower body than a joint family and
consists of only those persons who have taken, by birth, an
interest in the property of the holder for the time being and
who can enforce a partition whenever they like.
 State of Maharashtra v. Narayan Rao Sham Rao Deshmukh,
1985- “A Hindu coparcenary is narrower body than the joint
family. Only males who acquire the birth an interest in the
joint or coparcenary property can be members of the
coparcenary or coparceners. A male member of the joint
family and his sons, grandsons and great grandsons
constitute a coparcenary”

3.  It commences with a common ancestor and
includes a holder of joint property and only
those males in his male line who are not
removed from him by more than three
degrees.
 Sathyaprema Manjunatha Govda v. C.E.D,
(1997) – “Thus, while a son, a grandson or a
great-grandson is a coparcener with the
holder of the property, the great-great-
grandson cannot be a coparcener with him,
because he is removed by more than three
degrees from the holder”

4. ORIGIN
OF
COPARCENARY
 Coparcenary owes its origin to the concept of ‘Daya’
i.e. property which has been explained by
Vijnaneshwara while commenting on Yajnavalkya
Smriti in the ‘Daya Vibhaga Prakranam Vyavahara
Adhayay’
 Here, it was discussed by the Vijnaneshwara that
Daya is only that property which becomes the
property of another person, solely by reason of
relation to the owner. The words solely by reason of
relation exclude any other cause, such as purchase.
 Therefore, the unique concept of coparcenary is the
product of ancient Hindu jurisprudence which later
on became the essential feature of Hindu law in
general and Mitakshara School of Hindu law in
particular.

5. IMPORTANT
TERMS
HEIR- A person who is entitled to inherit
property after the death of the intestate is
known as heir. (S-3f)- HSA,1956
INTESTATE- A person who died without any
writing a ‘will’. (S-3g)
FULL BLOOD- When both Father and Mother
of two persons are the same, they are said to
be related to each other by full blood. (S-3e)
HALF BLOOD- When two persons have the
same father but different mothers, they are
related to each other by half blood(S-3e)
UTERINE BLOOD- When two persons have
same mother but different fathers, they are
related to each other by uterine blood(S-3e)

6. IMPORTANT
TERMS
 DESCENDANTS-The predecessors are the descendants.
P- Prepositus
D-Daughter S-Son
DD SS
DDD SSS
 ASCENDANT-Ancestors of a person.
MM FF
M-Mother F- Father
P
Up to Four
Generations
Three
generations
from the
intestate

7. IMPORTANT
TERMS
 COLLATERALS- They are descendants in parallel
lines from common ancestors.
M F
MS P FS
MSS FSS
Collaterals
MSSS FSSS

8. IMPORTANT
TERMS
 AGNATES- When a person traces his relation with another wholly through
males, he or she is an agnate. (S-3a)
P
D S
SS SD
 COGNATES- Whenever in the relationship of a person with another, a female
intervenes anywhere in the line, one is cognate to another. (S-3c)
P
S D
DS DD

9. IMPORTANT
TERMS
 LEGITIMATE RELATIONSHIP- When a person is born within
a lawful wedlock. He/she is legitimate.
 ILLEGITIMATE RELATIONSHIP- When a person is born
outside a lawful wedlock, h/she is illegitimate.
C (P) Wife
D S D
LegitimateIllegitimate

10. TWO
SCHOOLS
OF HINDU
LAW
HINDU LAW
MITAKSHARA DAYABHAG

11. MITAKSHARA
SCHOOL
 This school owes its name to Vijnanaeshwara’s
commentary on the Yajnavalkya smriti by the name of
‘Mitakshara.’
 This school prevails in the whole of India except Assam
and Bengal.
 This in spite of being a running commentary is also a
digest of practically all the leading Smritis and the deals
with all the titles of Hindu law.
 The date of composition is placed by Kane from A.D.
1100-1200. The word Mitakshara literally means a ‘brief
compendium’.
 The Mitakshara School follows the law of inheritance
based on the Principle of Propinquity i.e. on the nearness
of blood relationship.

12. MITAKSHARA
SCHOOL
 Doctrine of survivorship: the property after
the death of the common ancestor devolves
by the survivor.
 The sons of the family have a birth right in
the property by virtue of the following two
rules:
1. Females will not inherit.
2. Agnates to be preferred over cognates.
 These rules have made the Mitakshara
School reactionary.

13. MITAKSHARA
SCHOOL
 There are four Sub-Schools under the Mitakshara School:
MITAKSHARA
Dravid
Mithila Banaras
Bombay

14. MITAKSHARA
SCHOOL
Mithila
Banaras
Dravid
Bombay

15. DAYABHAGA
SCHOOL
 The term “Dayabhaga” is derived from a
similarly named text written by Jimutavahana
 Dayabhaga School/Bengal School - This school is
considered to be the dissident school of the
Benaras School.
 This school owes its origin to Jimutavahana’s
digest on leading Smritis by the name of
Dayabhaga.
 This School is prevalent in Assam and Bengal.
 Kane places the date of composition of
Jimutvahana’s literary career from 1090-1130 A.D

16. DAYABHAGA
SCHOOL
 This school is based on the principle of religious
efficacy or spiritual benefit.
 The ones who confer more spiritual benefit is
entitled to inherit the property in comparison to
those who confer less spiritual benefit based on
the Principle of Oblations.
 The females in the family may also inherit the
property.
 According to this School, the sons do not have a
birth right to the property.
 In the event of the coparcener dying issueless, his
widow has a right to succeed to his share and to
enforce a partition on her own account.

17. DAYABHAGA
SCHOOL

18. DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
MITAKSHARA
AND
DAYABHAGA
SCHOOL
MITAKSHARA
 JOINT FAMILY- A son,
by birth acquires
an interest in the
ancestral property of
the joint family.
 An adult son can
demand partition durin
g his father’s lifetime or
his three immediate
ancestors.
 Principle of propinquity
 COPARCENARY- all the
members of the Joint
family enjoy
coparcenary rights
during the father’s
lifetime.
 Doctrine of Survivorship
DAYABHAGA
 JOINT FAMILY-
The son has no automa
tic ownership right by
birth but acquires it on
the demise of
his father.
 Principle of Oblations
 COPARCENARY- This is
not possible under the
Dayabhaga school as
the father has overall
and uncontrolled
power over the family
property till death.
 (no diff. between
ancestral and separate
property)
 Doctrine of Succession

19. DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN
MITAKSHARA
AND
DAYABHAGA
SCHOOL
MITAKSHARA
 PARTITION- None of the
members of the
coparceners can claim a
definite physical share of
the joint property. So
partition in this system
involves in ascertaining
and defining the share of
the coparcener i.e. In the
numerical division of the
property.
 RIGHTS OF WOMEN-
The wife cannot demand
partition. She however
has the right to a share in
any partition affected
between her husband
and her sons.
DAYABHAG
 PARTITION- Each of
the coparcener has a
definite share in the
joint family property
even though the family
is joint and undivided
and the possession is
common.
 RIGHTS OF WOMEN-
This right does not
exist for
the women because th
e sons cannot demand
partition as the father i
s the absolute owner.

21. STATUS
OF
COPRCENARY
IN
INDIA
The concept of coparcenary was introduced in
the ancient India.
 Over the period of years the circumstances
changed, and with the need of the hour
Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was again
amended in 2005.
In the case of coparcenary property, or a case
in which two people inherit property equally
between them, the daughter and son are
subject to the same liabilities and disabilities.
The amendment essentially furthers equal
rights between males and females in the legal
system.

22. INHERITANCE
PROPERTY
TYPE
WIFE DAUGHTER SON RIGHT
ANCESTRAL/
JOINT
PROPERTY
NO YES YES BOTH SON
AND
DAUGHTER
HAVE EQUAL
RIGHT, NOT
WIFE
FATHER’S
SEPARATE/
SELF-
ACQUIRED
PROPERTY
(WHILE HE’S
ALIVE)
NO NO NO FATHER CAN
BEQUETHTHE
PROPERTY BY
WILL OR GIFT
Dead FATHER’S
SELF-
ACQUIRED
PROPERTY
YES YES YES THEY ALL
HAVE EQUAL
RIGHT IF
FATHER DIED
INTESTATE

23. CHANGES
BROUGHT BY
THE
AMENDMENT
ACTOF 2005
 This amendment is based on the 17th Report
of the Law Commission dated 5th May 2005
chaired by Justice B.P. Jeewan Reddy
 Mitakshara Dual mode of devolution of
Property was done away with – devolution
by either intestate or testamentary and not
by survivorship (by sons). [Section 6(3)]
 Section 23 & 24 were omitted which only
gave right of dwelling to women and not
ownership and only to unmarried or deserted
wife.

24. CHANGES
BROUGHT BY
THE
AMENDMENT
ACTOF 2005
 There is no longer two ways of schools of Hindu Law
basing their inheritance on fundamentally different
principles.
 One uniform law of succession.
 The concept of Reversioner has been abolished.
 The per stripes rule of succession is retained in
respect of class I heir, but in respect of other heirs,
per capita rule is applied.
 The Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005,
amended Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act,
1956, allowing daughters of the deceased equal
rights with sons.

26. Position of
Women after
EnactmentOf
Hindu
Succession
Act, 1956
 With this amendment, both male and female
will get equal rights. In a major blow to
patriarchy, centuries-old customary Hindu
law in the shape of the exclusive male
Mitakshara coparcenary has been breached
throughout the country.
 The significant change of making all
daughters (including married ones)
coparceners in joint family property has been
of great importance for women, both
economically and symbolically.

27. Position of
Women after
EnactmentOf
Hindu
Succession
Act, 1956
Women can become Kartas of the property.
Symbolically, all this signals that daughters
and sons are equally important members of
the parental family.
The daughter of a coparcener shall be subject
to the same liabilities in respect of the
coparcenary property as that of a son; and
Now under the amendment, daughters will
now get a share equal to that of sons at the
time of the notional partition, just before the
death of the father, and an equal share of the
father’s separate share. Equal distribution of
undivided interests in coparcenary property.

28. Position of
Women after
EnactmentOf
Hindu
Succession
Act, 1956
 However, the position of the mother
regarding the coparcenary stays the same.
 She, not being a member of the coparcenary,
will not get a share at the time of the
notional partition. The mother will be
entitled to an equal share from the separate
share of the father computed at the time of
the notional partition.
 In effect, the actual share of the mother will
go down, as the separate share of the father
will be less as the property will now be
equally divided between father, sons and
daughters in the notional partition.

29. Position of
Women after
EnactmentOf
Hindu
Succession
Act, 1956
Thus to get the benefit as per the amended
Act, the following conditions need to be
satisfied:
 She should have been born into the family.
 The undivided coparcenary property must
exist on 20.12.2004.
 Partition of the property ought not to have
taken place prior to 20.12.2004.
If any of the above three conditions are not
satisfied then the benefit under the amended
act will not be available.