9911796707
TMI Blog1949 (12) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment years 1942-43, and 1943-44, the income was assessed on the basis of the income of an undivided Hindu family represented by the widow Radha Ammal. The assessment year with which we are now concerned is the year 1944-46 and the accounting year is the year ending 16th November 1943. During the accounting year the widow entered into two partnerships in respect of the two heads of business with two different persons. One was with one Arnmugha Mudaliar who was an old clerk of the firm and concerned the handloom business. In respect of piece goods business she entered into partnership with one Govindaraja Mudaliar. We are now concerned only with the partnership relating to handloom business. This deed was presented for registration befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which have been created under the Act, it is urged, have effect of elevating the status of the widow and have the force of converting her status into that of a coparcener to enable her to acquire a representative capacity as a karta or managing member of the family. In my opinion, this view proceeds on an entire misconception of the position of a manager under the Hindu law and upon a wrong inference from the effect produced by the Act on the rights of the widow. The right to managership under Hindu law is conferred as a general rule on the father as the head of a joint family, if alive, and if he died, the right devolved upon the senior member of the family. The right to become a manager depends upon the fundamental fact that the person o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orts his contention. The view of the learned Judges, if I may say so with respect, is not based upon what the law is now as recognised by the texts and the decisions but what they considered the law should be. The judgment, in my opinion, makes out a plea for reform of the Hindu law in the manner indicated by the learned Judges but I am unable with respect to agree that under the Hindu law a woman who acquired rights under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act is clothed with the managership of the joint family by reason of such devolution of the property. I do not join in the condemnation of the Sanskrit tests as the learned Judges in that case did and dub them as containing archaic views. Nor do I agree with the view that progress ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .T.R. 313: (A.I.R. (36) 1949 Nag. 128), I should have con. sidered that his contention was unarguable. If we are asked to take our stand on the Hindu law as it has been laid down by Hindu legists and by judicial decisions of authority we know where we are. If we are asked to decide questions of Hindu law according to our own notions of how it should be developed according to the needs of modern civilization or a progressive society we are invited to wander, I know not where. There is no doubt or difficulty about ascertaining the rules of what may be called the Hindu common law or the rules of statute law applicable to the case. These matters are too well settled at this time of the day to admit of any doubt or difficulty; and, in my judgmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the property but only a right to obtain a share at a partition and if he died with-out exercising that right his interest lapsed or merged in the interests of the other members of the family and went to enlarge the share or interest of the survivors. The widow was no doubt recognised as a member of the joint Hindu family but her right was a right of maintenance from and out of the joint family estate. The Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act (XVIII [18] of 1937) made a departure from the Hindu law as laid down by the texts and declared by judicial decisions. The managership of a joint Hindu family is a creature of law and in certain circum-stances, could be created by an agreement among the coparceners of the joint family. Coparcener-s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irs who would take it as an ancestral property. The interposition of her limited interest does not make her a coparcener and cannot clothe her with the managership of the joint family in case she happened to be the eldest member of the family. It will be revolutionary of all accepted principles of Hindu law to suppose that the seniormost female member of a joint Hindu family even though she has adult sons who are entitled as coparceners to the absolute ownership of the property could be the manager of the family. The Act does not effect a statutory severance or disruption of the joint family, nor does it create a new type of managership of the joint family unknown to Hindu law and unwarranted by judicial decisions. To interpret the Act as h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
