Evolution Of Partition

Evolution of the concept of Partition under Hindu Law.

The case of Swaran Lata v. Kulbhushan Lal discusses the series of changes that the Hindu law, and in particular the concept of partition, has undergone since the commencement of the Hindu Succession Act, 195( hereinafter referred to as the ‘1956 Act/ HSA’) and subsequently since the passing of the Amendment Act, 2005 (herein after referred to as the ‘2005 Act’).

In this paper I have attempted to trace these changes and have analyzed the implications of each. The paper is divided into three sub periods starting from the period of classical Hindu law on the concept of partition to the 1956 Act, and finally to the 2005 Act. The paper concludes with an analysis of what implications these amendments and changes have on the society and the Hindu law in general.

defining the shares of the coparceners in the Joint Family Property.’ Thus partition in its simplest terms may be understood to divide, separate or to break away from. The concept though understood to mean the same thing, had different implications under the two classical schools of Hindu law. Under the Mitakshara School, no actual partition by metes and bounds was necessary. There mere communication of intention in itself was sufficient to affect partition. However, for partition under the Dayabhaga School, the partition could be affected only the actual assertion of the shares of each coparcener in the