9911796707
TMI Blog1945 (2) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the agreement ceases to be an amount received by her as member of an undivided Hindu family. For a proper appreciation of these questions, which are a bit involved, it is necessary to state the facts in some detail as they appear from the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal. There is an estate known as Sahaspur Bilari Estate in the district of Moradabad. The estate was till the year 1915 admittedly owned by a joint Hindu family of which the head and the karta was Raja Kishen Kumar. The family pedigree of Raja Kishen Kumar is as follows:- RAJA KISHEN KUMAR (Died on June 17, 1915). Raja Raj Kumar (Died on November 3, 1915). Senior Rani Rani Panna Kuar (Died on 3rd April, 1940) Junior Rani Rani Amrit Kuar. Raja Jagat Kumar (Died in March 1934) (married) Bibi Lachhmi (married) Senior Rani Rani Pritam Kuar Junior Rani Rani Jai Devi Kuar Raj Kumari Indra Mohini (unmarried) Raja Kishen Kumar died in June 1915 and then Raja Raj Kumar became the karta of the undivided Hindu family consisting of himself and his minor son Jagat and the other female members of the family. Raj Kumar also died in November 1915 leaving two widows Panna Kuar and Amrit Kuar. He also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we agree to treat her in a friendly fashion in future. "Parties will bear their own costs." In view of the compromise the Subordinate Judge passed the following order on July 1928:- "Parties have come to terms and file compromise. I, therefore, allow the case to be withdrawn in terms of the compromise." After the withdrawal of the suit, by an agreement dated May 5, 1932, the Court of Wards paid to Panna Kuar a sum of ₹ 10,000 in consideration of the withdrawal of the suit by her and agreed to raise the monthly allowance, that she was receiving, from ₹ 2,000 to ₹ 2,250 a month. It is common ground that during her lifetime Panna Kuar all along received this allowance. Jagat Kumar attained majority in or about the year 1933 and the estate was released from the superintendence of the Court of Wards in January 1933. By a notification dated 16th February, 1934, the provisions of Part I of the United Provinces Estates Act (VII of 1920) were made applicable to Raja Jagat Kumar in respect of the immovable property described in a schedule to that notification, in which he had a separate, permanent, heritable and transferable right. The Bilari Est ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ja Raj Kumar was alive a Hindu undivided family consisting of Raj Kumar, his son Jagat Kumar, his two wives and his unmarried daughter existed. On the death of Raj Kumar, Jagat Kumar was left as the sole surviving male member of the family and he became entitled to the estate by right of survivorship. There is abundant authority for the proposition that there can be a Hindu undivided family with a single male member provided there are widows of deceased coparceners or other persons entitled to maintenance from him, vide Vedathanni v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras [1932] 56 Mad. 1; 1 I.T.R. 70., Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay v. Laxmi Narayan [1937] 59 Bom. 618; 5 I.T.R. 416., and Bhagwati v. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. & C.P. [1941] 9 I.T.R. 31. Indeed it is not, and was not, disputed by the Department that there was within the meaning of Section 14(1) of the Act, an undivided Hindu family so long as Raja Jagat Kumar was alive. It is, however, argued by the learned counsel for the Department that there cannot be an undivided Hindu family consisting of only females and that the existence of at least one male member is essential for the constitution of a Hindu undivided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty the "coparcenary" no doubt comes to an end with the disappearance of the last male member of the family, but, as already pointed out, the existence of coparcenary is not essential for the existence of a joint Hindu family. It follows that the continuance of coparcenary can be no test for the determination of the question whether a particular Hindu family is or is not undivided. Take a case where an undivided family consists of A, his wife and his two unmarried daughters. On the death of A the property of the family will devolve not by survivorship but by right of inheritance. All the same after the death of A, his widow and his daughters may decide to remain undivided. They being Hindu and members of the same family will undoubtedly constitute a Hindu family and as they continued to remain undivided, the family must, we consider, be regarded as an undivided Hindu family. For the reasons given above we answer the first question referred to us in the negative. The answer to the second question must also, in our judgment, be in the negative. That, even before the agreement of May 1932, Panna Kuar was receiving a sum of ₹ 2,000 on account of her monthly allowanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
