Chapter on Partition

The partition of jointly owned property that cannot be divided except with detriment or upon payment of compensation is not permissible without the consent of the partners—for example, small houses, a small bathhouse, and a small mill, ...............

His statement, “Partition”: this is a noun derived from “I divided the thing,” that is, when one makes it into portions. A single thing may be made into two, three, four, or five portions; the point is that when you make something into portions, this is partition. It is of several types, as the author will mention. But here a question arises: Why did the author place the chapter on partition here? Would it not have been more appropriate to place it in the chapter on partnership, since it relates to two partners dividing what lies between them? Or in the chapter on sacrificial animals, since two people may share ownership of a cow or a camel and need to divide it? Or in the chapter on inheritances, or the like?

The answer is that it is in fact relevant to several chapters: sacrificial animals, inheritances, bequests, endowments, and partnerships. Thus, it has a connection to many chapters of jurisprudence. Yet they mentioned it here because partition generally requires an appointed divider. This divider is either appointed by the two partners, in which case he is like a man appointed as arbitrator by two litigants. We have previously mentioned at the beginning of the Book of Judicial Procedure that if two people appoint a man between themselves who is qualified to serve as a judge, his ruling is enforceable. Or the divider may be appointed through the judge—that is, the judge appoints him—in which case the matter is connected to judicial procedure. For this reason, most jurists placed the chapter on partition within the Book of Judicial Procedure, because its relevance there is apparent; and the chapters that have a connection