History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v1.c6.s59.1

v1.c6.s59.1

The Kalpataru⁶⁶¹ of Lakṣmīdhara in its vyavahāra section quotes the views of a jurist Halāyudha several times. The Vivādaratnākara of Caṇḍeśvara mentions Halāyudha dozens of times. In the Smṛtisāra of Harinātha⁶⁶² Halāyudha-nibandha on possession is quoted. The Smṛtisāra also says (folio 140 a) that Halāyudha favoured *niyoga* by the widow of a son-less deceased person and deprived the widow of succession to her deceased husband if she did not submit to *niyoga*. This was the view of Dhāreśvara also. According to Halāyudha⁶⁶³ parents succeeded before brothers to a deceased person if the property in the hands of the deceased was ancestral, but that if it was acquired without detriment to ancestral property then brothers succeeded even before parents. Halāyudha is cited in the Vivādacintāmaṇi also, e. g. Halāyudha⁶⁶⁴ held the view that the verse of Yāj. (II. 126) was intended to convey that where joint property was concealed by a member and was discovered after partition, he did not incur the guilt of theft. This same view was held by Jitendriya and others. Raghunandana quotes Halāyudha in his Divyatattva, Dāyatattva and Vyavahāratattva. The Vīramitrodaya⁶⁶⁵ also quotes Halāyudha.