History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t1.69

v4.c63.t1.69

Kāt. (839) also says that the son has no ownership in the father's self-acquisition.¹²¹⁸ When Yāj. II. 114 allows the father either to give the best share to the eldest son or to make an equal division among all sons, the Mit. explains that this unequal division holds good only as to the self-acquisitions of the father. Similarly when Nār. (dāyabhāga 12) or Śaṅkha-Likhita say that the father may take two shares for himself, that is with reference to self-acquisitions, acc. to the Mit. Manu IX. 104 stating that sons have no power over property during the life of the parents refers to the self-acquisitions of the parents. In modern times courts have followed the view that a Hindu father (or any Hindu person whatever) may give, sell or bequeath by will his self acquired property (whether movable or immovable) to any body he likes (vide *Rao Balwant Singh v. Rani Kishori* 25 I. A. p. 54 at pp. 67-68 where the two verses cited by the Mit. were held to contain only a moral precept and not a rule of law capable of being enforced).