Classification of Property

Classification of Property
• 1. Apratibandha Daya and Sapratibandha Daya
• 2. Joint family property or Coparcenary property and
Separate or Self acquired Property.
• Apratibandha daya means unobstructed heritage –
all property inherited directly by the male ancestor
by the reason of falling within 3 generations, and
• Sapratibandha daya means obstructed heritage –
going beyond the 3 generation and the previous
ancestors are the obstruction to inherit the property.
 Joint family property or coparcenary
property
• –the important factor of every HJF. - classified
into following heads
• property inherited from father, father’s father
or father’s father’s father, (u/s 8 HAS)
• Property inherited from maternal grand-father
and
• Inherited from any other relation (never a
joint property)
 Case laws on property inherited from
maternal grand-father
• Venkayyamma v. Venkatarayyamma (1902)25 Mad – 2
brothers inherited from maternal grand father, one of
them died without a male issue, his wife claimed on the
rule of succession and the brother on the rule of
survivorship (mitakshara Law), Madras provincial court
gave the ruling in favour of the brother to inherit the
property as the last sole surviving heir.
• In Md. Husain v. Kisheva 1937 PC- went against the earlier
judgment and held that when a Hindu inherits property
from his maternal grand mother or father, his son does not
acquire any interest by birth in the family.
 Property thrown into common stock and
blended property:
• when a coparcener mixes his separate
property with the joint family property, and
deals with his separate property in a manner
that he leaves no doubts that he wants to
treat it as part of the joint family property,
such property becomes a joint family property.
- This is known as ‘throwing in to the common
stock’ - If he mixes his property with the joint
family property it is known as blending.
• In Mallesappa v. mallappa, 1961 SC 1268 –
Gajendragadkar.J , said that ‘the conduct on which
the plea of blending is based must clearly and
unequivocally show the intention of the owner of
the separate property to convert his property into
an item of joint family property, - A mere intention
to benefit the members of the family by allowing
them the use of the income from the separate
property may not necessarily be enough to justify
an inference of blending’.
• In Narayanan v. Radhakrishna 1976, SC 1715 –
Shah J – said, ‘ the separate property or self-
acquired property of a coparcener may be
impressed with the character of joint family
property, if it is voluntarily thrown by the owner
into the common stock with the intention of
abandoning his separate claim therein, -but to
establish such abandonment, a clear intention by
waiver of separate rights must be established.
 Recovered joint family property
• When one coparcener, without any assistance
from the joint family funds or from his fellow
coparceners recovers with the acquiescence
of his coparceners, ancestral property which
has been lost to the joint family without any
possibility of recovery, the property so
recovered will be: The separate property of
the recovered.
 Accretions
• Accretions are all incomes, accumulations, or
acquisitions of property made with the joint
family nucleus. It includes:
a) Accumulations of income of the joint family
property;
b) Property purchased or acquired with the
intention of the joint family, and
c) Proceeds of the sale of joint family property or
property purchased out of such sale-proceeds; -
These have been, all along, accepted as part and
parcel of joint family property.
Separate or Self- Acquired Property
• Yajnavalkya sums up the doctrine of self-
acquisition as: whatever is acquired by the
coparcener himself, Without detriment to the
father’s estate,
• As a present from a friend, or
• A gift at nuptial,
• Does not appertain to the co-heirs,
• Earning remuneration, fee or commission, an
element of skill or labour may also be involved.
THANK YOU