Thirdly, the alienation to the plaintiff was valid

Thirdly, self-acquired property is alienable without any restriction but coparcenary property is not thus freely alienable. A gift of coparcenary property, for instance, would be void.

It may be observed that what coparcenary property was at one time may become self-acquired property and vice versa. Thus what to start with is self-acquired property may be thrown into the hotchpot and by the process of blending become coparcenary property.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Suppose two brothers partition their coparcenary property. Then each holds the share allotted to him as his separate property but the moment a son is born to him the property becomes coparcenary property. The converse case of coparcenary property becoming self-acquired property is well illustrated by Ram Devi v. Gyrasi, ILR 1949 All. 160 (FB).

A died leaving two undivided sons S1, and S2. S1 had a son S3; and S2 had a son S4. So the property was coparcenary property; subsequently S1, S2 and S4 died and S3 became the sole surviving coparcener.

In the hands of S3 the property has become separate property. S3 sold the property to the plaintiff and died. The widow of S4 claimed the property. It was held that the alienation to the plaintiff was valid as the property at the time of the alienation had become self-acquired property freely alienable in the hands of the sole surviving coparcener.