9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (7) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e it was explained before the Commissioner that the assessee had received the impugned properties as gift from his paternal uncle under three deeds of gift dated 12-9-1952, 29-6-1954 and 6-9-1954, that though the assessee was described as the donee, the gifts were meant for the benefit of his family and that, therefore, the gift deeds had created an interest in favour of the HUF consisting of the assessee and his children. It was, therefore, claimed that the inclusion of the said properties in the individual assessments of the assessee was not justified. The Commissioner, however, was of the view that the recitals in the gift deeds indicated very clearly that donee was given full rights of enjoyment in the property for himself and that his progeny would also be entitled to inherit the property eventually. He further observed that the recitals in the deeds also clarified the above view by giving full rights of alienation and disposition to the assessee exclusively. He held that the intention of the donor was only to give full rights over the property to the assessee and not to create any rights in favour of the HUF of the assessee as claimed. He accordingly set aside the assessments ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onor from the language of the document taken along with the surrounding circumstances in accordance with the well-known canons of construction. He pointed out that the facts in the case before the Supreme Court in Periakaruppan were different in that the recitals in the documents were not the same is in the instant case. 5. The learned counsel further submitted that the donor having indicated in the documents that the donee, i. e., the assessee should enjoy the properties 'putra poutra paramparya', had also stated that the properties should be enjoyed by the assessee with absolute rights, which comprised of also the right of alienation. In this connection, he drew our attention to the ruling of the Delhi High Court in Raghbir Singh v. Budh Singh AIR 1978 Delhi 86, in which the Court pointed out that the different parts of a document should be construed harmoniously and the document should be construed in such a way that the language of a part of it, if given full effect to, would not result in making the other part of the document defeasible. The learned counsel submitted that even a HUF has powers of alienation for limited purposes and that the Commissioner had erred in holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , there could be no question of making a gift to a non-existing coparcenary. He pointed out that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case it must be held that the donor had gifted the properties under consideration to the assessee as an individual only. 7. We have considered the rival submissions. It is common ground that the properties under dispute were the subject-matter of gifts made by the paternal uncle of the assessee under the three deeds dated 12-9-1952, 29-6-1954 and 6-9-1954. The deeds are stated to be written in Telugu. The learned counsel for the assessee has, however, furnished to us free English translation of the same. The relevant operative recitals in the aforesaid deeds, in seriatim, as per the free English translation, are as under : DEED DATED 12-9-1952 - "The said vacant site shall be enjoyed by you 'putra poutra paramparaya' with a right to gift, sale, etc." DEED DATED 29-6-1954 - "The said vacant site is for enjoyment for you, putra poutra paramparya with absolute rights of sale, disposition and gift. You may, therefore, pay all the taxes due to Municipality and death duty leviable by the Government attributable to this property etc., and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e an 'estate of inheritance', by which is meant that the heirs of the grantee take by inheritance from the grantee. ... In an Indian will the words putra poutradi krama are words of limitation denoting an estate of inheritance---Ram Lal Mukerjee v. Secretary of State [1980] 7 Cal. 304" The learned counsel for the assessee had strongly contended that the interpretation of the words 'putra poutradi krame' made by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Pandubala Debi would not apply to the facts of this case because, according to him, the context of this case was different from that case. We have gone through the aforesaid decision. In that case the plaintiff had claimed that the lease read with ekrarnama did not confer a permanent lease of a certain property but it was really a lease for the lifetime of the male heirs of the grantee. The Court extracted the relevant portions of the patta and ekrarnama at page 995 of the said report. In the patta it was provided that the grantee would continue to enjoy and possess the premises by residing therein through sons, grandsons, etc. (putra poutradi krame). The Court further extracted the ekrarnama which provided that the daughter or daug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erty as heads of their family units. The use of the words 'heirs, executors, administrators and assignees', in the context in which they appear, in our opinion, indicate on the contrary that the gift was to the sons absolutely, the property gifted being both heritable and alienable. There is nothing in the two documents to suggest that the interest transferred to the sons was limited in any way. The surrounding circumstances also do not support Mr. Desai's contention. As stated already, for many years following the gift, the appellant in either group of appeals used to file returns in the status of an individual and was being assessed as such . . . . ." The facts obtaining in the instant case are similar. Instead of the words heirs, executors, administrators and assignees, the words 'putra poutra paramparya' are used in the instant case. The words putra poutra paramparya have been interpreted by the Calcutta High Court and in the Judicial Dictionary referred to above as meaning heirs including female heirs. It is common ground that in prior years inclusive of the assessment year 1977-78 under appeal the assessee had been admitting the aforesaid properties obtained under the afore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
