MEANING, DIVISION OF RIGHTS AND DIVISION OF PROPERTY

ABSTRACT

The foundation of society structure and personal interactions is the dynamics of rights and property division within legal frameworks. To clarify these complex ideas and their meanings, ramifications, and core legal principles, this research article will undertake a thorough investigation of them.

The diverse range of legal entitlements and liberties that are bestowed upon individuals or institutions under a legal framework is embodied by rights. These cover a wide range of topics, such as property rights, human rights, and civil rights, among others. The study examines the subtleties and categories of rights, defining them as fundamental or derivative, acquired or inherent, and examining the legal ramifications of each. In addition, it discusses the legal safeguards that surround these rights and how various legal systems across the globe protect them.

Property is an essential component of human society and refers to belongings and resources that are transferable, owned, and controlled. It includes both intangible assets like intellectual property rights and tangible assets like land and goods. This study clarifies the various types of property, including personal and real property, and looks at how they are owned within legal contexts. It also explores the laws and rules that defend property rights, highlighting how important they are for promoting business ventures and social structure.

Beyond simple definitions, the ideas and methods guiding the partition of rights are explored. It breaks down the procedures for distributing, transferring, and upholding rights, including the intricate process of assigning and licensing rights. It also examines the legal frameworks that support the implementation of these rights, looking into the methods by which legal remedies are pursued to preserve and defend legal rights.

In addition, the study deftly negotiates the complex terrain of property division. It looks into the intricacies of equitable distribution, inheritance laws, and legal systems’ procedures for settling property disputes. The study sheds light on the practical implementation of property partition concepts by examining case studies and legal precedents, demonstrating the various strategies and results used in various countries.

Allocating rights and dividing property are not just legal formalities; they have a tremendous effect on economic activity, community dynamics, and personal welfare. This study aims to evaluate the social consequences and implications of property division and rights within this particular society framework. It highlights the points at which legal concepts and society values interact by taking into account the cultural, social, and economic elements that affect how rights are allocated and property is divided within various legal systems.

Keywords

Rights, Property, Division, Legal Framework, Allocation, Transfer, Enforcement

INTRODUCTION

In every legal system in the world, the interwoven ideas of property division and rights serve as the cornerstone for establishing social connections, duties, and rights. This thorough investigation attempts to untangle the complex web of property division and rights allocation within the legal system, as well as their nuances and underlying ideas.

One of the main components of legal systems that control the distribution, transfer, and enforcement of these rights is the partition of property and rights. The processes that govern the licensing and assignment of rights play a crucial role in defining the extent and boundaries of legal rights. Comprehending these procedures is essential to grasping the dynamics that underlie intellectual property transfers, contractual agreements, and the distribution of rights and obligations.

Furthermore, situations involving inheritance laws, equitable distribution, and the settlement of property disputes highlight the difficulties involved in property partition. To maintain the integrity of property rights within social frameworks and to ensure fair and just outcomes, the legal frameworks governing these features are essential.

Partition is the separation of property into two halves. According to Hindu law, partition is the dividing of a joint Hindu family’s property to grant the undivided coparceners a separate status. It is important to remember that in a joint family with only one coparcener, there can be no division. A person who inherits property as cohier with others is known as a coparcener.

According to Hindu law, the idea of a coparcener is an essential component of the joint family property. Every coparcener owns an equal portion of the Joint Hindu Family’s property, and they all retain an inherent title to it. A Hindu joint family’s status as a joint family end if they choose to partition. However, to develop a condition of jointness among the coparceners in a family, it is important to have at least two coparceners present in the household.

On the property that is capable of partitioning, a partition may be possible. Partitioning is not permitted if any of the coparceners in the joint family has separate property3. The court held in Mrutunjay Mohapatra v. Prana Krushna Mohapatra that property acquired by the elder brother using his own means could not be divided and added to the Joint Family at the request of a younger sibling.

In the matter of Joy Kanta Krushna Mohapatra v. Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra , According to the court, property that is owned by the paternal uncle and for which there is no convincing proof regarding the claimant’s father’s portion of the property would be regarded as distinct property rather than belonging to the Joint Hindy family.

OBJECTIVES

Examine the meaning and significance of property in legal contexts, assessing its many forms, ownership systems, and legal protections.
Examine the procedures and tenets that regulate the distribution of rights, including their assignment, transfer, and implementation.
Examine the legal ramifications and intricacies of property division, including inheritance, allocation, and settlement of disputes.

DISCUSSION

The discussion section aims to offer a thorough study of how property and rights are divided within legal frameworks by revealing the layers of meaning that are contained within them. It breaks down the various types of rights—from property rights to civil liberties—and illustrates the implications and legal safeguards associated with each. The discussion of property includes the intricacies of ownership arrangements and legal protections.

“The Division Act” is referred to as Partition. Partition refers to the real division of property and the severance of the joint status or interest. By doing this, the coparceners break off their ties to the joint family. Before the division, the coparcener or coparceners’ share is unknown; but, following the division, the share becomes certain and assigned to the appropriate members.

The definition of partition is “the act of dividing, especially into individually owned interests from real property held jointly or in common by two or more persons.”

It is the distribution of patrilineal and real estate among the coparceners. Following the division, each can take pleasure in their portion of the estate as well as their geographical stake.[1]

The Hindu Joint Family is divided into parts, or partitions, which terminate a coparcenary’s life. Partition, as defined by Mitakshara School, signifies two things:

Loss of standing or concern
The actual division of property, sometimes referred to as division by metes and bounds, into the shares that are designated. The Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law defines partition as limited to the metes and bounds division of property. It is necessary to partition at least two coparceners.

Separation was governed by two different sets of Hindu law:

Mitakshara
Dayabhaga

The two schools of thought that govern the concept of partition under Hindu law are Mitakshara and Dayabhaga, respectively. The term “Partition” has two different meanings according to both schools. In the Mitakshara school of thought, partition refers to more than just the division of property into distinct shares among the coparceners; rather, it denotes a division of status and a severance of interest. In other words, in ancestral property, the coparceners’ shares vary according to their birth and death. This implies that when a joint family experiences a birth, the coparceners’ shares naturally increase, and when a death occurs, the shares naturally decrease. Property rights, according to this school of thought, are generated at birth and devolve via survivorship. The property doesn’t need to be divided according to metes and bounds because the partition is considered to be finished once the shares are established. As a result, unity of ownership is regarded by the Mitakshara school of thinking as a fundamental component of the coparcenary.

Dayabhaga school: Each adult coparcener in a Dayabhaga school retains the right to request partition by the physical demarcation of his portions. This division needs to follow the boundaries of designated portions of the division, i.e., division by metes and bounds.

Features –

Each heir holds a specific share that is determined under
The sons under Dayabhaga do not inherit any interest from birth.
It is conceivable for a father to dispose of the ancestral property with the coparceners’ consent.
According to the Dayabhaga, a female’s opportunity to be a coparcener is restricted to specific circumstances.
The sons are unable to assert their claim to the ancestral property while their father is living.
There is a possession exclusivity over the joint family.[2]

CASE – Commissioner of Wealth Tax, West Bengal v. Bishwanath Chatterjee and Ors – JUDGEMENT – “Dayabhaga law is the unity of possession,” it was said. Each coparcener receives a certain portion of the property, which he owns. As soon as the inheritance becomes vested, that portion is established. It remains constant despite family members’ births and deaths.

Mitakshara School: In Mitakshara School, property is not divided into discrete shares, and while the requirements for a coparcener must be met, the existence of joint property is not a prerequisite for requesting partition. An unequivocal declaration expressing his decision to leave the family is all that is required to demand a division.

Types of Partition –

De Jure division: In an undivided coparcenary, every current coparcener has a joint share in the property, and none of the coparceners may determine his precise shareholdings until the division is finalized.

Furthermore, because of the application of the survivorship theory, the interests may continue to change as a result of the other coparceners’ births and deaths. However, a sort of partition known as De Jure partition occurs when the interests of the community are divided at the request of one coparcener or through mutual agreement that the shares are now clearly defined or demarcated; in this case, the Doctrine of Survivorship is not applicable.

De facto Partition: Unity of Possession, which denotes that the coparceners may even continue to enjoy their property even after their joint status or community interest is divided. Although the number of shares in the property may not be set, each coparcener retains the right to assert that any particular property belongs to him exclusively. “This division of property, known as a de facto partition, affects the breaking up of the unity of possession.”

Components of an enforceable division –

Importantly, a coparcener retains the power, at any moment and without the other coparceners’ permission, to demand partition. Therefore, the following prerequisites must be met to raise demand for partition:

The decision to leave the Joint Family must be deliberate.
The intention to leave the Joint Family must be expressed in a unilateral, unambiguous, and clear proclamation.
If the Karta is not present, the other coparcener must be informed of the intention.
[3]

Types of Property Divided

First-Handled Property

The property that a person earns from his own hard-earned money and is not inherited from his forefathers. Any land obtained by donation or may also be understood to be a self-acquired land. Property that is self-acquired cannot be divided while the owner is still alive. The owner of the property may designate in his Will who he wishes to receive his property throughout his lifetime. The heirs of Class 1 inherit the property in the event that the owner passes away without leaving a will.

Patrimony

Any asset possessed by a person’s ancestors is considered ancestral property. There must be four generations on this farm.

Individuals qualified to request division

Every coparcener of a joint Hindu household has the right to request the division of the coparcenary property, according to Hindu law. All coparceners do not, however, have an absolute or unfettered right to partition enforcement.

The following people have the right to request a division:

Coparceners: Regardless of whether they are requesting a partition as sons, grandsons, or great-grandsons, both major and minor coparceners are entitled to a share during the partition, according to Hindu law. A coparcener has the right to seek partition at any time, for any cause, as long as the family’s Karta complies with the demand legally. In this case, the title is divided among the coparceners through a partition, giving each of them an undivided stake in the property and exclusive possession. When a minor is the party claiming partition, the guardian of the minor must file the lawsuit on the minor’s behalf. That is the sole requirement that needs to be met[4].
Female Members: Three categories of women make up the female members in this context: the bereaved mother, the paternal grandmother, and the father’s wife. When the joint family property is really divided after partition, female sharers generally have the right to receive their share, even though they are not allowed to request a division. Regarding the father’s spouse, in the event of a division between a father and his sons, the spouse is entitled to a portion that is equivalent to that of a son, regardless of whether the father initiated the division or if a son requested it. For whatever reason, the boy will inherit the whole estate from his father and the wife will receive nothing if he dies without dividing it, according the theory of survivorship. However, when a partition actually happens after the death of the father, a widowed mother’s share is equal to that of her brother, while a paternal grandmother’s share is equal to that of a grandson when a partition occurs after the death of her sons.
Disqualified Coparcener: A member of a joint family who has no congenital disqualification from birth will acquire a right by birth in the coparcenary property; if he later becomes insane, his interest in the property will not be taken away from him. However, any coparcener who is incapable of managing and enjoying the property due to any deformities, such as incurable blindness, lunacy, leprosy, etc., from the time of the birth would be considered disqualified and [5]will be disentitled to a share during partition.
Sons Born After division: Sons born after division but begotten before the partition are generally divided into two categories: those born or conceived after the partition and those born after the partition. Stated differently, a son who is considered to be in her mother’s womb would be considered to exist for legal purposes and would be eligible to reopen the partition to get an equal portion with his siblings. However, in the event that a son is born after the partition and his father has already taken his share of the property and split from the other sons, the newborn son will also be entitled to his father’s share of the partition; in this instance, however, he will not be able to reopen the partition for his own property.
Son Of A Voluntary Or Voluntary Marriage – According to the law, a male kid born into a void or voidable marriage is entitled to inherit his parents’ separate property since he is their legitimate offspring. He is not eligible to inherit his parent’s relatives’ belongings. As far as statutory legitimacy is concerned; the male child might be treated as a coparcener for the possessions held by the father. He is not entitled to request partition while the putative father is still alive. Moreover, he can only request partition following the passing of his father. Thus, a son born out of a void or voidable marriage has more superior rights than an illegitimate child.
Adopted Son: In the current situation, a legitimate adoption can allow an adopted son to join the joint family. This modification was made with the enactment of HAMA, 1956, which updated and clarified all adoption-related laws. After adoption, an adopted son is now regarded as dead in the natural family and is assumed to have been born in the adoptive family; as a result, he has a birthright to the joint family property as of the adoption date. Thus, he has the right to request a division of the joint family property and is entitled to an equal portion with the adoptive father.
Illegitimate Son: In accordance with Hindu law, an illegitimate son’s entitlement to a portion during the division process is contingent upon his caste. An illegitimate son can currently inherit from his mother but not from his father. An illegitimate son is not considered a coparcener under the law and does not have any vested interest in the joint Hindu family property, therefore he is not entitled to demand a division as far as the three castes of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, and Vaishyas are concerned. He is nevertheless qualified for support from his father’s fortune.

Right to Demand Partition –

Generally speaking, each coparcener in a Hindu joint family has the right to request that the coparcenary/Hindu joint family property be divided.

Unique fatherly authority: A Hindu father is entitled to create a division between himself and his sons. He is entitled to use this power regardless of his kids’ express approval or disapproval. Thus, the property may be severed in accordance with the father’s unique authority.
Son, Grandson, and Great-Grandson: Regardless of whether they are sons, grandsons, or great-grandsons, any coparceners who are majors and of sound mind are entitled to demand partition at any time. Any coparcener can make a clear demand, with or without justification, and the Karta is legally required to abide by it.
Daughter: In addition, daughters have the right to claim division, as do sons born in a mother’s womb, adopted sons, sons born following a null or void marriage, illegitimate sons, etc.

Case – In the Pachi Krishnamma v. Kumaran [6]

The court found that although the daughter had claimed an equal portion with her son in the division of joint family property, she had not produced any documentation of her customs supporting her claim. However, with the 2005 change to the Hindu Succession Act, a daughter now has the authority to request a division of joint family property and to assert an equal stake with her son.

Case – Prakash & Ors. v. Phulavati & Ors[7].:

In light of this, court concluded that live daughters of living coparceners as of 9-9-2005 are entitled to the rights under the amendment, regardless of when they were born. Any disposition or alienation, including partitions, that may have occurred prior to December 20, 2004, in accordance with the laws in effect at that time, shall not be impacted. Any subsequent partition transaction will be controlled by the explanation.

Case – Danamma Suman Surpur & Anr. v. Amar & Ors [8]

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India ruled on February 1, 2018, that daughters have equal rights to ancestral property, even if they were born before the Hindu Succession Act was passed.

Minor coparcener: When dividing property, it is important to consider whether doing so will be in the minor’s best interests or if it could jeopardize those interests. It is important to remember that the court has the power to determine whether a certain case comes within the minor’s interests.

According to Hindu law, the Karta of the joint family will serve as the minor’s guardian if the minor has an undivided stake in the joint family. Nonetheless, the rights of the minor and major are comparable in terms of the ability to seek partition by an individual.

CONCLUSION

A division can be characterized as an idea in Hindu law that is primarily governed by the Mitakshara and Dayabhaga schools of thought, in that order. Partition primarily occurs inside the Joint Hindu Family, signifying the division of the jointness and the unity of possession among the members of the Joint Family.

It is important to remember that in Hindu law, a division may occur through a will, arbitration, notification, or agreement. It has been duly declared under the Mitakshara school of law that division can occur by branch or by stripes. But according to the Dayabhaga school, division is only permitted following the passing of Karta in the family. Thus, it may be said that Dayabhaga School does not adhere to the coparcenary notion.

Thus, it can be concluded that the act of partitioning serves as a means of dissolving a Hindu joint family. A joint family property becomes each coparcener’s self-acquired property according to its shares during the partitioning process. Partitioning can be accomplished by cutting off the mutual link, by dividing the land by metes and bounds, or by both. Partitioning in the true sense only occurs when the joint status of Hindu Undivided Families is dissolved.

The study’s findings support the importance of property and rights in legal frameworks. It emphasizes the need for strong legal frameworks, fair procedures, and a careful balancing act between the law and society norms. The complex dance of property division and rights allocation impacts social institutions, legal frameworks, and personal experiences. The study encourages continued discussion since it acknowledges that these ideas are dynamic and because the boundaries between property, rights, and the ever-shifting legal and social environments are constantly altering. Therefore, rather than being the end, the conclusion acts as a springboard for further investigation into the fields that shape our social, legal, and economic interactions.

REFERENCES

[1] https://lexpeeps.in/partition-meaning-division-of-right-and-division-of-property/

[2] https://blog.ipleaders.in/critical-analysis-partition-hindu-law/

[3] http://familylaw.lawnotes16mrks.com/Family/Partition.html

[4] https://www.legalbites.in/partition-hindu-law/

[5] https://ijalr.in/volume-3/issue-1/partition-meaning-subject-matter-of-it-division-of-rights-division-of-property-and-persons-entitled-to-demand-it-by-pavitra-somani/

[6] AIR 1982 Kerala 137

[7] 2016) 2 SCC 36

[8] (2018) 3 SCC 343

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.

Admin

PDF 📄

Published by Admin on January 26, 2024January 26, 2024