preventing compulsory partition is the reduction in value caused by the division; they do not take into account whether the partners can benefit from their respective shares after division or not.

His statement, “or payment of compensation”: an example is land jointly owned by two partners which cannot be made equal either by portions or by value except through payment of compensation. That is, for example, it contains mountains, valleys, or trees, so that it can never be apportioned equally by shares. If we divide it into two halves, one tract will be better than the other; and if we divide it into thirds, giving two-thirds to the owner of the inferior portion, it still will not be equal. It can only be equalized by giving the one with the deficient share compensation for the complete share. Thus, its division too is a consensual partition: if both parties agree, it may be divided; otherwise, it remains undivided and is sold as a whole. It cannot be equalized unless we add money to the deficient share. It therefore resembles a sale, because it involves consideration and that for which consideration is given; and a sale is valid only by mutual consent.

His statement, “such as small houses”: small houses cannot be divided without detriment. For example, if a house has a bedroom, a dining room, and a kitchen, and there are two partners, while the bedroom is two metres wide and two and a half metres long, the kitchen is one metre by one metre, and the dining room is two metres by two metres, then this house is too small to be divided at all.

His statement, “and a bathhouse”: this too cannot be divided, such as a bathhouse shared between two houses, because a bathhouse is generally small.

His statement, “and a mill”: a mill is small, so it cannot be divided. However, the author says, “the two small ones.” Thus, if the mill and the bathhouse are large, they may be divided.