Author: TYC

ISSUE:

Whether the income received by right of survivorship by the sole surviving male member of a Hindu undivided family can be taxed in the hands of such male member as his own individual income, or it should be taxed as the income of a Hindu undivided family, for the purposes?

RULE:

With the death of father, the son survived as the sole surviving coparcener. However, because there is no coparcener other than him, it does not follow there is no Hindu Undivided Family. The rights of the female members and other surviving members of the family continue to exist and the possession of family property by sole surviving coparcener is subject to these rights of the other surviving members of the family.

The family is considered to be joint unless and until proved to the contrary. The property was ancestral. But there is a distinction between the HUF and coparcenary. For the purposes of taxation, what is taken into account is the existence of a Hindu Undivided Family and not the existence of coparcenary.

ISSUE:

Whether Messer’s Ghamandi Ram Gurbax Rai would fall under the exceptions mentioned in the Notification dated 19-02-1952, exempting “companies or associations or bodies of individuals whether incorporated or not”?
Can a son of a Hindu father and mother married under the Special marriage act be considered as a member of his father’s joint family?

RULE:

The ‘unobstructed heritage’ devolving on such family, with its accretions, is owned by the family, as a corporate body, and one or more branches of that family, each forming a corporate body within a larger corporate body, may possess separate ‘unobstructed heritage’ which with its accretions, may possess separate ‘unobstructed heritage’ which, with its accretions, may be exclusively owned by such branch as a corporate body.

ISSUE:

Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to demand a partition at all assuming them to be members of an undivided family?

RULE:

Suppose, however, that A dies after D, leaving a great-grandson D1 and the two sons of D, E, and F. In this case E and F could not sue D1 for partition of property descending from A, because it is inherited by D1 alone, since, E and F, being sons of a great-grandson, are excluded by D1, A‘s surviving great-grandson, the right of representation extending no further.
Introducing B1, C1, D1, E1, and F1 and B2, C2, E2, E2, and F2, as additional descendants of A, all forming an undivided family, might render the case a little more complicated and affect the value of their shares, but could not destroy the right if any, of E and F to share the joint family property with the other members.

ISSUE:

Whether a son born out of a wedding of a Hindu Father and a Christian Mother could be said to be a Hindu for the purposes of forming a HUF with the father for Tax purposes?

Can a son of a Hindu father and mother married under the Special Marriage Act can be considered as a member of his father’s joint family?

RULE:

Legitimate children of a Hindu father by a Christian mother who are brought up as Hindus would be governed by Hindu Law. Thus, son of a Hindu father and mother married under the Special Marriage Act will be a member of his father’s joint family.

ISSUE:

Whether illegitimate children are entitled to a share in the coparcenary property or whether their share is limited only to the self-acquired property of their parents under Section 16(3) of the Hindu Marriage Act?

RULE:

Section 16(3) as amended, does not impose any restriction on the property right of such children except limiting it to the property of their parents. Therefore, such children will have a right to whatever becomes the property of their parents whether self-acquired or ancestral.

ISSUE:

What is ancestral property? Whether property inherited from a maternal grandfather would constitute grandson’s separate property?

RULE:

The word "ancestor" in its ordinary meaning includes an ascendant in the maternal, as well as the paternal, line; but the "ancestral" estate, in which, under the Hindu law, a son acquires jointly with his father an interest by birth, must be confined, as shown by the original text of the Mitakshara, to the property descending to the father from his male ancestor in the male line. The expression has sometimes been used in its ordinary sense, and that use has been the cause of misunderstanding.

ISSUE:

Whether when self acquired property of father given to son becomes ancestral or self acquired in the hands of son?

RULE:

• Property gifted by a father to his son could not become ancestral property in the hands of the donee simply by reason of the fact that the donee got it from his father or ancestor.

ISSUE:

Whether the grounds of dismissal of appeals by High court and other courts valid?

Whether plaintiff is entitled of all the plaints properties?

RULE:

Rules of procedure are meant to advance the cause of justice and not to short circuit decision on merits.

If a person inherits property, whether movable or immovable, from his father or father's father, or father's father's father, it is ancestral property as regards his male issue.