Coparcenary not limited to four degrees from common ancestor 319

coparcener are included as coparceners along with his sons and are recognized as
Qoparceners in their own right.
Illustration
'fable Xll.2 shows a coparcenary consisting of several families, A with his three sons B. C
and D, and their sons and gran<!sons constitute the 'main' family. B with his two sons E and F.
Cwith his son G, D with his sons H and J and his grandsons J and K, and / with his sons J and
K., constitute 'branch' families. All the families have one common ancestor A. Each branch
fll'ni\y has a\so its own head, namely B, C, D and I. On A's death, the coparcenary will consist

,,
~.! Q( the three brothers, B, C and D and their male issue. On the death of Band C, the coparce-
i:._ n1cy wi\\ consist of D, his nephews E, F and G and his male issue H, I, J and K.

~- Table XII.2
!~. A

"-t.
~i': I
B
I
I
C
I I
D
I
I
'"A"···
;l'f H I
·< · E F G
,t
I I I
J K

Genesis of Coparcenary.-A coparcenary is created in the following manner: A

Hindu male A, who has inherited no property at all from his father, grandfather,
or great-grandfather, acquires property by his own exertions. A has a son B, B
.I,,
I

does not take any vested interest in the self-acquired property of A during A's
I,
I,
lifetime, but on A's death, he inherits the self-acquired property of A. If B has a i: •'
son C, C takes a vested interest in the property by reason of his birth, and
the property inherited by B from his father A, becomes ancestral property in his
(B's) hands, and Band Care coparceners as regards the property. If B and C con-
tinue joint, and a son D is born to C, he enters the coparcenary by the mere
fact of is birth. Moreover, if a son E is subsequently born to D, he too becomes a
coparcener.
Composite Fami/y.-As regards what is described in20the South as a 'composite
family', reference may be made to the undemoted cases.

§ 213. Coparcenary not limited to four degrees from common ancestor.-

Though every coparcenary must have a common ancestor to start with, it is not to
be supposed that every extant coparcenary is limited to four degrees from the
common ancestor. A member of a joint family may be removed more than four
degrees from the common ancestor (original holder of coparcenary property), and
yet he may be a coparcener. Whether he is so or not, depends on the answer to the
question whether he can demand a partition of the coparcenary property. If he can,
he is a coparcener, otherwise, not. The rule is that partition can be demanded by
any member of a joint family who is not removec;i more than four degrees from the

63
20 Subbayya v Sitaramamma, AIR 1959 AP 86; Venkatasubba Reddi v Pitchamma, AIR 1960 AP 2 ;
Veerapa Naidu v Venkaiah, AIR 1961 AP 534.
 320
Chapter XII-Joint Hindu Family Coparceners, etc.

last holder,
holder of thehowever
property.remote he may be from the common
· ancestor or original

When a member of a joint family is removed more than four degiees from the last
holder, he cannot demand a partition, and therefore, he is not a coparcener [Illustra-
tion (a) and (b)}. On the death, however, of the last bolder, be would.become a mem-
ber of the coparcenary, if he was fifth in descent from him, and would be entitled to
a share on partition, unless his father, grandfather and great-grandfather bad all pre-
deceased the last holder. The reason is,-and here we have another important rule
bearing on the subject in hand that whenever a break of more than three degrees oc-
curs between any holder of property [A in Illustration (c)] and the person who claims
to enter the coparcenary after his death [E in Illustration (c)], the line ceases in that
direction li.e., the direction of C, DJ and E in Illustration (c)] and the survivorship is
confined to those collaterals and descendants (D in Illustration (c)] who are within
t~e limit of four degrees (Illustration (c)].21

I
f,
~• l'
Illustrations
(a) A inherits certain property from his father X. He has a son B and a gnmdson C, bolb
members of an undivided family. A, Band Care coparceners. A son D 1s the_n born to
C. D becomes a coparcener by birth with A, Band C. Subsequently, a son E ts born t?
D. Eis not a coparcener, for being fifth in descent from A, he cannot demand a P.ru:t1-
tion of the family property. On A's death, however B will become the head of the JOI~t
family and E will step into the coparcenary as the great-grandson of~. thou~ he 1s
fifth in descent from A, the older. Likewise, on B's death, F (E'~ son) will st_ep mto_the
coparcenary as the great-grandson of C, head of the family for the time bemg,
though he is sixth in descent from A, the ongmal holder.

Table Xll.3
1
A
I
B
I
C
I
D
I
E
I
F
d · h'is hands. He isdnotf the
Im
Note that the property inheri~e by A from his Idfather is ancestra
and manage the property as the_h~a o t_he
owner of the property' he is entitled ~erely to h~ershi of the property is in the Jomt famti~
famil.Yu·for of
andhimself
on behalf
and o~
histhe family.
three Theo B' C a~d D. They are all co-owners, or, as
descendants
cons1s ng . A th
ex ression goes coparceners. D E F G and H, with as e
p(b) Suppo~ a coparcenary consist
common ancestor. Suppose A ies
•~~~ti~~:.;.
'
CC, tl,.,; D,and then£, and that G

21 Moro Vishvanath v Ganesh, (1873) 10 Born HC 444·' Yenamala v Yenumwla, (1870) 6 Mad
. HC 93.
 Undivided coparcenary interest 321

has then a son J, and H has a son J and J has a son K. On E's death, the coparcenary
will consist of F, G, H, I, J and K. Suppose that G, Hand J die one after another, and
the only survivors of the joint family are F, I and K. Are/ and K coparceners with F?
Yes, though I is fifth in descent from A, and K is sixth in descent from A. The reason
is that either of them can demand a partition of the family ~roperty
2 from F. Here the
coparcenary consists of three collaterals, namely, F, I and K. ,'

i Table:XII.4
J
A
I
B
I I
I
C D E
I I I
F G H
I I
I J
I
K
(c) A inherits certain property from his father X. A has a son B, a grandson C, two great-
grandsons D and DI, and a great-great-grandson Eby D1; all members of a joint fami-
ly. Here A, B, C, D, and DJ are coparceners, Eis not, being more than four degrees
removed from A. Suppose B dies first. The coparcenary will now consist of A, ,C, D
and DI. The death of B does not introduce E into the coparcenary, for A being still
alive, his great-great-grandson cannot be a coparcener with him. Suppose C dies next.
The coparcenary will now consist of A, D and DJ. The death of C does not introduce
E into the coparcenary, for A being still aliye, his great-grandson cannot be a coparce-
ner with hiq1.. Suppose DI dies next. The coparcenary will consist of A and D. The
death of DI does not introduce E into the coparcenary, for A being still alive, this
great-great-grandson cannot be a coparcener with him. Suppose A dies next, D now
becomes the sole surviving coparcener, and the joint family property will pass to D by
survivorship. The death of A does not introduce E into the coparcenary. The reason is
that at the time of A's death, E's father (DI), his grandfather (C) and his great-
grandfather (B), were all dead.

[ Table:XII.5
A
I
B
I
C

D DJ
I
E

214. Undi~ded _coparcenary interest-The essence of a coparcenary under

M1takshara law 1s umty of ownership. The ownership of the coparcenary property is

22 Moro Vishvanath v Ganesh, (1873) 10 Born HC 444.