Introduction: The law of Inheritance deals with rules, which govern devolution of property on the death of its owner. In Hindu law, the concept of the joint family system came much earlier in point of time; the law of inheritance came later and applied only to the property belonging exclusively to a person as distinguished from property held by the joint family. In the primitive age, Women and children were alike. They were classed as chattels and possessed no right of property. In course of time, the son's right was recognized, then the right of other male kinsmen. At this stage of social evolution, women were still chattels. They had still no rights of their own. The recognition of woman's right of inheritance is of comparatively recent origin. Several difficulties and complications however came in the way owing mainly due to the differences in the law of inheritance amongst the two major school of Hindu laws viz. the Mitakshara and the Dayabhaga and the Matriarchal systems prevailing in some Southern parts of the country. Besides this, some more anomalies and some early inequitable rules. of succession had come into existence partly due to historical reasons and .partly due to the conservative approach of judicial interpreters. Conflicting pronouncement of the law courts added to the existing confusion arid legal reform on the subject became the pressing need of the day. Difference between Mitakshara & Dayabhaga Coparcenary: The following features of difference between a Mitakshara coparcenary and a Dayabhaga coparcenary are noteworthy: (i) As to how the Coparcenary Arises: Under the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law there is no right by birth. So during the father’s life - time between the father and the sons there is no coparcenary. When the father dies, his sons constitute a coparcenary. The Mitakshara coparcenary arises during the life-time of the father itself and his sons have right by birth. (ii) Nature of Interest of Coparceners: In the Dayabhaga School of Hindu Law each coparcener has a defined interest. It can be alienated. It does not pass by survivorship. In the Mitakshara coparcenary the coparcener’s share is not defined. It fluctuates with births and deaths of coparceners. It passes by survivorship. So the power of alienation either does not exist or is recognised only a limited extend (as in Bombay and Madras). (iii) Expansion of Coparcenary: