A person who is within four degrees from the common acquirer is entitled to claim a share by partition even if he is more than four degrees removed from the last owner.

Gajendragadkar, J.

1. After dealing with certain points not material to this report his Lord-ship proceeded.] In support of his contention that the pltfs. cannot claim a share by partition in the properties in suit Mr. Abhyankar has raised an interesting point under Hindu law. He con-cedes that Bhaskarrao who is the common ancestor of the parties in the present suit is within four degrees in ascent from the pltfs. The pedigree shows that Bhaskarraos son was Narayanrao, Narayanraos son was Vinayakrao, the pltfs. are Vinayakraos sons. Mr. Abhyankar, however, points out that the defts. against whom the present claim has been made are beyond four degrees in descent from Bhaskarrao. That again is true; because according to the same pedigree Bhaskar-raos eldest son was Ramchandrarao, Ramchan-draraos son was Ballalrao, Ballalraos eldest son was Ganpatrao, the two defts. for whom Mr. Abyankar appears are the sons of Ganpatrao. Mr. Abhyankars contention is that it is a rule of Hindu law that a partition cannot be demanded by any person who is more than four degrees re-moved from the last owner. In this case accord-ding to Mr. Abhyankar the pltfs. are clearly removed by more than four degrees from the defts. so they cannot make a valid claim for partition under Hindu law. Now, it is well settled that a Hindu coparcenary is a much narrower body than the joint Hindu family. The joint Hindu family consists of persons who are lineally descended from a common ancestor. Such a family includes the wives of the male members as well as unmarried daughters; as soon as a daughter marries she leaves the family of her birth becomes a member of her husbands family. It is quite true that every member of a joint Hindu family is not a coparcener. A coparcenary consists of persons who acquire by birth an interest in the joint or coparcenary property. This right by birth entitles a coparcener in most cases to demand a partition of the coparcenary property. To this rule an exception is recognised in the State of Bombay where a son is not permitted to claim a partition when his father is living in union with his own collaterals. Subject to this exception, however, the right to demand a partition ia the necessary result of the right by birth which a coparcener has in the undivided property of the coparcenary. Obviously every coparcenary begins with a common ancestor, but it is not the rule of Hindu law that such a coparcenary is necessarily limited to four degrees from the common ancestor. Whether a member of an undivided family is a coparcener or not would depend upon whether he is entitled to demand a partition, that naturally would in its turn depend upon the question whether he has a right in the property of the coparcenary by his birth. Broadly stated, all members of a joint Hindu family who are not removed more than four degrees from the last holder are coparceners, however much remote they may be from the original holder or acquirer of the property. If a person is removed by more than four degrees from the last holder, he does not acquire any interest in the property of the family by birth, A as such he is not entitled to demand a partition. Even in such a case as soon as the last holder dies, the distance between the next holder the person who was more than four degrees removed from the last holder would be reduced by one degree with the result that such person would be entitled to enter the coparcenary would be clothed with the right to demand a partition of his share in the properties of the family. As has been observed by Mayne :

"..... As each fresh member takes a share, his descendants to the third generation below him take an interest in that share by birth. So the coparcenary may go on widening extending, as long as its members include agnates descended from a common ancestor, irrespective of their degrees of agnatic relationship to each other. But this is always subject to the condition that no person who claims to take