It is interesting to note the points of difference between the concept of joint tenancy of English Law and a Hindu coparcenary under the Mitakshara Law. The former resembles a Hindu coparcenary in as much as the existence of the right of survivorship and the right to obtain a partition are the common features of both. However, there are several important points of distinction between the two, viz.:
(i) A Hindu coparcenary is a creation of the law, and can never be created by an act of parties. A joint tenancy, on the other hand, can be created by an agreement between two persons.
(ii) Members of a coparcenary have a common ancestor, whereas a joint tenancy may be created even between two strangers.
Image Source: cdn.shareyouressays.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(iii) A coparcenary could (until 2005) consist only of males, whereas there is no such restriction in the case of joint tenancy.
(iv) The interest of a coparcener fluctuates from time to time, whenever there are births or deaths in the family; a joint tenant continues to hold his specified share all the time.
(v) In a coparcenary, the coparceners’ interest comes into existence at different times, namely, from the time each coparcener is born, whereas the title of all the joint tenants arises simultaneously, namely, from the date of the agreement.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(vi) The children of coparceners take an interest in the coparcenary property by birth; the children of a joint tenant do not acquire any such interest.
(vii) The widow of a deceased coparcener is entitled to maintenance; a widow of a joint tenant has no such right.
(viii) A coparcenary can be put to an end by partition, whereas a joint tenancy can be destroyed either by partition or by an alienation of the interest of a joint tenant.