9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of coparcenary interest under Estate Duty Act, 1953 in the case of a deceased widow who adopted a son. Analysis: The case involved a deceased widow who adopted a son and the dispute was regarding the coparcenary interest in the Hindu undivided family property under the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The deceased widow's husband had died in 1928, and upon his death, the property passed to her. In 1942, she adopted a son, and upon her death in 1977, the question arose about the extent of property passing on her demise. The accountable persons claimed she had no coparcenary interest, while the authorities held that she became an absolute owner of the property left by her husband. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty concluded that the deceased widow had full ownership of the property as per the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Appellate Controller also confirmed this view, stating that she became entitled to a share in the properties that passed on her death. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was then approached, where it was argued that the property vested on the death of the husband was divested upon the adoption of the son in 1942, and the adopted son's rights related back to the date of the husband's death. The Tribunal referred to Hindu law provisions and held that the widow's interest was displaced upon adoption, making the adopted son the sole coparcener. The Tribunal also noted that the deceased widow had no interest in the family property except the right of maintenance, as per the Hindu Succession Act. The High Court analyzed various legal precedents, including the rights of adopted sons, the doctrine of relation back, and the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937. It was established that upon adoption, the adopted son acquires rights as if he existed at the time of the adoptive father's death. The Court cited cases supporting the principle that the adopted son divests the widow's estate and becomes the coparcener. The Court also highlighted that the widow could not claim partition, and the adopted son's rights prevail over collateral heirs. The Court emphasized that the widow's interest was limited to maintenance only, and the property vested in the adopted son as the karta of the Hindu undivided family. Ultimately, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision that the deceased widow had no coparcenary interest in the family property except the right of maintenance. The Court found that the deceased widow's interest ceased upon her death, and the adopted son became the sole coparcener. The matter was remanded for quantifying the value of the right of maintenance. The reference was answered in favor of the assessee, and against the Revenue, with no order as to costs.
|
