DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0104
EARLY LAW OF PARTITION.
89
claim to damages for trespasses on his ground,1 and about Lecture
the decision of boundary disputes between two land- v-
owners,2 shows him possessed of all the substantial attri-
butes of independent ownership. Many estates were leased
out, for half the crop, to farmers or riots (Ardhika or Ardha-
slrin).3 It is true that the Smritis refer to quarrels con-’
cerning the boundaries of two neighbouring villages.4
But these quarrels may have related to pasture land, woods
and the like, or else to private fields adjacent to the village
boundaries. Each villager might claim the assistance of
his co-villagers against an encroaching neighbour from
another village. The corporate feeling among the members
of a village community was very strong, and the villagb
system has been justly pronounced to have been the basis
of an Indian state. There exists also a trace of a right of
pre-emption among the members of one village in a text5
which declares the assent of townsmen, of kinsmen, of
neighbours and of heirs as requisite for any transfer of
landed property. In the time of the Commentators, how- '
ever, this text had become entirely divested of meaning
and was explained away by them.6
In Sanskrit Law, then, the lowest unit is the joint-family The joint-
or rather the coparcenary. Two persons may live to-
gether in an undivided family, without being coparceners denary.1’"
in the strict sense of the term. It will be seen from the
Law of Inheritance, that the vested right to inherit does not
extend beyond the great-grandson, the great-great-grandson
coming in as a very remote heir only. The same rule
applies to the Law of Partition. All members of a joint-
family, who are removed more than three degrees from the
common ancestor, have a claim to a share on partition. Ori-
ginally, the right to a share would seem to have extended,
like the right to inherit,' to the grandson only.
The rules regarding partition may be arranged under Division of
four heads : (1) the property to be divided ; (2) the time of the subject.
1 Gant. VII. 19 ; Manu VIII. 241 ; Yajn. II. 161 ; Vishnu V. 146 ;
Narada XI. 29, etc. »
2 Manu VIII. 262 ; Yajn. II. 154 ; Narada XI. 12. etc.
3 Manu IV. 253 ; Yajn. I. 166 ; Vishnu LVII. 16.
4 Manu VIII. 245—261 ; Yajn.II. 1501—53 ; Narada XI. 1—12 ; Vivada-
chint. 120—127, etc.
5 Mitaksh. I. 1, 31, etc.
6 In the Punjab' the right of pre-emption is still in existence and
recognized by Statute. See Mayne, § 210.
’ See post. Lecture VIII.
89
claim to damages for trespasses on his ground,1 and about Lecture
the decision of boundary disputes between two land- v-
owners,2 shows him possessed of all the substantial attri-
butes of independent ownership. Many estates were leased
out, for half the crop, to farmers or riots (Ardhika or Ardha-
slrin).3 It is true that the Smritis refer to quarrels con-’
cerning the boundaries of two neighbouring villages.4
But these quarrels may have related to pasture land, woods
and the like, or else to private fields adjacent to the village
boundaries. Each villager might claim the assistance of
his co-villagers against an encroaching neighbour from
another village. The corporate feeling among the members
of a village community was very strong, and the villagb
system has been justly pronounced to have been the basis
of an Indian state. There exists also a trace of a right of
pre-emption among the members of one village in a text5
which declares the assent of townsmen, of kinsmen, of
neighbours and of heirs as requisite for any transfer of
landed property. In the time of the Commentators, how- '
ever, this text had become entirely divested of meaning
and was explained away by them.6
In Sanskrit Law, then, the lowest unit is the joint-family The joint-
or rather the coparcenary. Two persons may live to-
gether in an undivided family, without being coparceners denary.1’"
in the strict sense of the term. It will be seen from the
Law of Inheritance, that the vested right to inherit does not
extend beyond the great-grandson, the great-great-grandson
coming in as a very remote heir only. The same rule
applies to the Law of Partition. All members of a joint-
family, who are removed more than three degrees from the
common ancestor, have a claim to a share on partition. Ori-
ginally, the right to a share would seem to have extended,
like the right to inherit,' to the grandson only.
The rules regarding partition may be arranged under Division of
four heads : (1) the property to be divided ; (2) the time of the subject.
1 Gant. VII. 19 ; Manu VIII. 241 ; Yajn. II. 161 ; Vishnu V. 146 ;
Narada XI. 29, etc. »
2 Manu VIII. 262 ; Yajn. II. 154 ; Narada XI. 12. etc.
3 Manu IV. 253 ; Yajn. I. 166 ; Vishnu LVII. 16.
4 Manu VIII. 245—261 ; Yajn.II. 1501—53 ; Narada XI. 1—12 ; Vivada-
chint. 120—127, etc.
5 Mitaksh. I. 1, 31, etc.
6 In the Punjab' the right of pre-emption is still in existence and
recognized by Statute. See Mayne, § 210.
’ See post. Lecture VIII.