Hindu Law and Custom (Recht und Sitte) c7.773

c7.773

In this connection let it be mentioned, though it has been already roferred to, that a younger brother or a collateral becomes the head of the family if he is particularly fit to be so, but according to Śaṅkhalikhita he can be so only with the consent of the eldest brother. Such a property manager, whoever he may be, is rewarded by his brothers for his labour and receives presents (Nār. 13,35). He may claim however no further privileges and along with the other members of the family he too has to bear the burdens of inheritance such as the maintenance of the widows and the daughters of deceased brothers, marriage of the daughters, initiation of minor brothers, payment of the debts of the father etc. (Nār. 13,26 f., 31 f. etc.). Also the members of the family rendered ineligible to inheritance by illness or corporeal defects etc., are a burden of the inheritance (§ 23), while on the contrary if a brother though able to work does not work for indolence, he may be compelled to separate from the joint-family with a small compensation.¹ The sons had more difficulty with a father who badly managed the family property and therefore it was in the interest of the family principle not to maintain the *patria potestas* in all its rigours but also to afford the sons a direct right of protest and a claim to property. Thus the principle was developed that the father and the sons have equal right of disposition on the property inherited from the grandfather (Vi. 17, 2 ; Y. 2, 121 etc.). According to the later texts even the immovables and the slaves acquired by the father himself cannot be sold without consulting all the sons about it and usually when giving away or selling a family property the consent of all the members of the family is needed¹.