History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.1163

v4.c63.1163

¹¹⁰⁹ Vide *Shantaram v. Waman* 47 Bom. 389 for the proposition that, both according to the Mit. and the Vyavahāra-mayūkha, a piece of land reserved as a common passage at the time of partition cannot be subsequently divided and *Nathubhai v. Bai Hansgavri* 36 Bom. 379 and *Govind v. Trimbak* 36 Bom. 275 for the propositions that rights of way and rights to wells and water belonging to a joint family are, if numerically unequal, indivisible, that there is a presumption that they continue joint and undivided even after partition, unless it is proved that at the partition a right of way or to water was exclusively allotted to a single member (at p. 277 and p. 282 the texts about water are quoted).