Partition Under Hindu Law

Author: Mudit Goswami 


A partition is a demonstration by which a coparcener cuts off his relations with the joint family and loses his status of a coparcener and turns into a free individual from the connections of the joint family. A significant outcome of such partition is that the portion of coparcener or coparceners looking for partition which is till partition questionable, fluctuating and capricious, gets specific and definite, because of partition, and in this way designated to the separate individuals.

Along these lines, Mitakshara partition is utilized into two distinctive points: initially, the alteration into specific shares the various privileges of the various individuals as per the entire family property; furthermore; the severance of the joint status, with the legitimate outcomes coming about in this way. It has been characterized as the crystallization of the fluctuating benefit of a coparcenary into a particular share in the joint family property.  Thus, under the Dayabhaga is the solidarity of ownership.

Under the Dayabhaga law, it implies a division of property as per the particular portion of the coparcener. That is to say, separating joint belonging for example separating or isolating the share among coparcener as per distributes and bound. Division of property as per the particular portion of the coparceners. Thus, under Mitakshara the essential of coparcenary is the solidarity of proprietorship.


The coparcenary property is the only estate which is subject to the partition. Private or separate property is not liable to partition at all. Also, the property in which the of primogeniture applies won`t liable for division. However, if a joint family is in control of a property held by it as the permanent lease, such property is additionally liable to partition among the coparceners. There are some properties which are not accessible for partition like the stairs, prepared food, utensils, garden and so on due to their unified nature.

In Nirupama v. Baidyanath AIR 1985 Cal 406, regarding the home, the court held that the attempt will be to impact an arrangement which will leave the house in the possession of at least one coparcener or saved for regular use.

It is a general standard that ‘if the property can be partitioned without destroying the intrinsic value, a money compensation should be given instead of the share which would fall to the plaintiff by the partition.’

There is a certain method accessible for modifications for partition:

1) Some of the properties might be benefitted in by the coparceners mutually or reciprocally

2) Some of the property allocated to the portion of a coparcener and its value balanced with the property distributed to different coparceners.

3) Some of the property might be sold and their returns dispersed to different coparceners.


Each coparcener’s privilege stretches out to the entire joint family property; however, every last one of them has a share for the entire family property, he has no unequivocal share in that. The partition can occur in two different ways:

  1. De jure Partition: When the network of intrigue is broken or isolated and changed over into a fixed share leaving no degree for the utilization of doctrine of survivorship, this sort of partition is known as by de jure partition or at the end of the day, the severance of the joint status.
  2. De facto Partition: Unity of ownership can be kept up considerably after severance of joint status. The shares may get fixed yet no coparcener can guarantee any property as falling into his exclusive share. It isn’t certain that which property will go to which coparcener. At the point when this solidarity of ownership is broken by a genuine physical division of the property, it is called as de facto partition or partition by metes and bounds.


Before the division of joint family property, arrangements ought to be made for the accompanying liabilities attached to the property:

  1. Debts- Arrangements for extraordinary debts of father or the karta taken for sake, or with the end goal of the joint family ought to be made.
  2. Maintenance- There are a few individuals from the Hindu joint family who are not coparceners but rather qualified to be kept up out of the joint family property, they can be-
  3. Disqualified coparceners and their immediate dependents
  4. Mother, step-mother, grandmother and other females entitled to be maintained by the joint family property
  5. Unmarried sisters
  6. Widowed daughter of a deceased coparcener
  7. Marriage expenses of daughters if there should arise an occurrence of the family which comprises of father and children as coparceners, arrangements ought to be made for their unmarried daughter’s marriage. In the event of a family comprising of siblings as coparcenary, arrangements ought to be made for the marriage of their unmarried sisters before partition.
  8. Execution of specific functions and customs arrangements ought to be made for the basic ceremonial expenses.


Both the schools i.e. MItakshara and Dyabhaga allows every coparcener to seek partition and entitled them to share. Even a minor can ask for a partition. Apart form this following coparcener cannot seek partition:

  1. Under Bombay school, children can’t request partition against their father if the latter is connected with his own father or collateral.
  2. Unqualified Coparcener

In this way, the coparceners reserve the privilege to request a partition and each coparcener is qualified for have his share. Following are the people qualified for request partition.

  1. Father- He can force a partition, between his minor child and himself with bonafide expectation, else, it will reopen by the coparcener. On account of significant child and father, it ought to be by common assent.
  2. Children and Grandsons, and a great-grandson- Under Bombay School, the child cannot seek partition without the consent of his father, if the father gets together with his own father and if there should be an occurrence of Punjab Customary Law, as Punjab Customary law does not give a right to lawson of partition by birth.
  3. Child Born after Partition- As indicated by Vishnu and Yajnavalkya the partition ought to be revived/reopened to give the concerned share after the birth of a child.
  4. Adopted Son- A legitimate adopted male child qualifies to become an individual of a joint family. He likewise has the privilege to partition and equivalent share too. As per Dayabhaga Law,” an adopted child when contrasted with after brought into the world natural child, he takes one third share, in Bombay and Madras one fifth share, and in Banaras one fourth of the portion of the last mentioned. The laws identifying with selection has been altered by the passing of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.
  5. Minor Coparcener- A minor coparcener, not at all like the major coparcener, can’t request partition from the father or the Karta, yet this, in any case, doesn’t imply that the partition won’t be influenced at his instance. In specific cases, where a father may act in such a way, that may unfavourably influence the minor’s advantage, at that point, a minor can document a suit for partition against the Karta through his well-wisher or next friend.
  6. Alienee- A non-coparcener doesn’t have the option to request partition, however, there’s an exemption where the share has been estranged by a unified coparcener, in states where he is permitted to do as such, at that point the alienee can request partition. An alienee doesn’t have the right to have joint ownership of the property as he is an alien to the family. Such partition won’t have any unfavourable impact on the status of rest of the coparcener.

No female has a privilege to partition however if that partition happens, some female (Father’s Wife, Widowed mother and paternal widowed grandmother) has an appropriate for a share in the partition. After the 2005 amendment, daughters under Hindu family are also entitled to partition. However, a coparcener is missing at the time of partition, it is suggested that his share is to be kept independently. In the event that no share has been saved aside for him, he is qualified to get the partition reopened.

Partition which is done partially have a different set of effects on estate:

  1. As to property- For the situation when the joint Hindu family claims more than one property in better places, and one of the properties is to be sold or separated, such partition is partial partition as to property.
  2. As to people- For the situation where just one of the individuals from the joint Hindu family needs to isolate from the rest, such partition is incomplete or partial partition as to people.


  1. By conduct of family member- If one of the members of the joint family express his intention to live separately, even though no actual partition is takes place.
  2. By Agreement- In the event that all the coparceners choose to destruct their joint status, it is known as a partition by an agreement. This need not be recorded as a hard copy. From the date of consenting to the agreement, the severance of the status happens. The shares dispensed to the coparcener in the partition by an understanding of agreement need not be equivalent.
  3. By Notice- The fundamental component of partition is the aim to isolate which must be conveyed to different coparceners. Hence, partition may become effective even by a notification to the coparceners, regardless of whether joined by a suit or not.
  4. By will- At the point when the coparceners make a will which contains an unmistakable and unequivocal suggestion of their desire to cut off themselves from the joint family is known as partition by will. In Potti Lakshmi Perumallu vs Potti Krishnavenamma 1965 AIR 825, 1965 SCR (1) 26, the Supreme Court observed, “where there is nothing in the will executed by a member of Hindu coparcenary to unmistakably show that the intention of the testator was to separate from the joint family, the will does not affect the severance of the status.”
  5. By conversion- Change of religion a coparcener to a non-hindu religion consequently prompts the severance of status of that coparcener from the joint family. He loses his participation in the coparcenary however this doesn’t influence the status of other coparceners inter se.
  6. By Arbitration- An arbitrator may be appointed for the purpose of partition, who separate the property by dispenses and limits. In Kamal Singh v. Sekkar Chand, AIR 1952. Cal 447, The court held that the partition must be to support the minor. Else, it won’t be binding on him.
  7. By Father- Under the Hindu law, a power is given to father in the activity of which he can bring out partition all alone if the coparcenary comprises of the father and his children only. He can isolate his children from himself and furthermore separate the children from each other without the assent of the children. This exceptional power of father is a piece of the ‘patria potestas’ (paternal power) that was perceived by Hindu law.
  8. By suit- The most well-known approach to communicate one’s goal to isolate himself from the joint family property is documenting a suit in the court. When the offended party communicates his unequivocal aim to get isolated in the court, his status in the joint family property reaches to a termination. In any case, a decree from the court is required which chooses the particular portions of the coparceners. The severance of status happens from the date of filing such suit in the court. Both a minor and a significant coparcener may move toward the court for this reason.


Typically, when a partition is made it can’t be reopened on the grounds that a share can be separated just for once. But there are sure special cases to this general guideline. Following are where partition can be reopened:

  1. Mistake- A suit can be filed, if any of the joint family properties have been kept separate from partition by mistake, they can be exposed to partition later.
  2. Fraud- The partition can be revived if any of the coparceners had done any fraudulent or mala fide act. For instance, if any of the property has not been made liable to partition fraudulently.
  3. Disqualified Coparcener- Due to certain reasons, the disqualified coparcener may be oppressed from his share of the property at the hour of partition. In such a circumstance, he could get the partition expelled after the exclusion is evacuated.
  4. Child in Womb- If a child is in the Womb at the hour of partition, and no share was dispensed to him, at the hour of partition afterwards it tends to be revived.
  5. Adopted Son- The embraced child is allowed to re-open the partition in the event that if the widow of a coparcener embraced a child after the partition. Such appropriation under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956 related back to the date of death of deceased husband and such adopted child can revive partition.
  6. Missing Coparcener- Coparcener who is absent at the hour of partition has an option to revive the partition in the event that he is missing at the hour of partition and no share is allocated to him.
  7. Minor Coparcener- If a minor coparcener can guarantee for reviving the partition in the event that he isn’t alloted his share at the timed of partition, in the wake of achieving larger part. However, that at the time of partition his interests are not be appropriately protected then he can reopen the partition.

Note: Typically, sons are not entitled to any share in the presence of the father. The share of the deceased coparcener goes to his beneficiary afterwards.


Partition is an idea under Hindu law and is directed by principally two ways of thinking, viz. Mitakshara and Dayabhaga. Partition among a joint Hindu family implies severance of status of jointness and solidarity of ownership among the individuals from the family. The partition can occur by different techniques like by means of, notice, will, arbitration, agreement and so forth. Under Mitakshara school, the partition may occur by stripes or by branch, anyway under Dayabhaga school, partition happens simply after the demise of the karta[1], the dayabhaga school follows no idea like coparcenary.

In this way, it very well may be presumed that partition is an instrument which plays out the capacity of carrying a Hindu joint family to its end. Through the component of partition, a joint family property turns into oneself gained property of each coparcener according to their shares.

[1] Head or Manager of the Hindu Joint Family is called Karta.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close