The Viramitrodaya is in substantial agreement with the theory of the Mayukha. The Vivadatandava is against the narrow views of the Bengal school, whereas the Smrtichandrika states that the mother inherits whatever property will be counted as the Adhyagnika. The Dayabhaga, though giving absolute power to a woman over Stridhana does not enumerate the kinds of property, but only excludes certain kinds. Katyayana, however, definitely lists what kinds of property cannot be included in Stridhana. The property acquired by a woman by mechanical arts or given through affection by a stranger is to be excluded from Stridhana. The properties given to a woman at certain times, under certain conditions, as ornaments to be worn on festive occasions, or with a, fraudulent design, e.g., in order to cheat coparceners of their share of certain property under pretence that it had been given to a daughter, are to be excluded from it, and he limits the amount of Stridhana, in that it should not exceed two thousand annas in value, and all the immovable property cannot be included in it.58 This limitation of the amount of Stridhana is in substantial agreement with the views of Kautilya.

Thus in almost all the commentaries and digests the word Stridhana came to be used in a restricted sense, and did not cover the entire property of a woman. The inherited property and the immovable property are not under her full dominion. The husband shares the right with her. The Mitakshara states clearly that the husband can use the Stridhana under certain circumstances.