9911796707
TMI Blog1922 (12) TMI 2X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the estate and the monies and property representing the investments from this income are distinct, and need to be separately considered. They have both been decided adversely to the appellant, with the exception of the claim to certain Government securities which will be more specially referred to hereafter. Serampore Raj or Gadi is impartible, and the family is governed by the Mitakshara law. If there had been no division of the family the property would have passed to the plaintiff but it is asserted that Bharath Singh separated from his father in his life-time, and that consequently neither he nor the plaintiff was joint in estate with Raja Saroda Narain. 2. Now, the facts upon which this alleged separation is based have been concu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ish such saparation. 4. The case of Kawal Nain v. Prabhu Lal illustrates this. It was there found that the separation relied on was a complete separation in worship, in food, and in estate; and, further, there was good reason for the complete separation, and that consequently the requisite evidence was forthcoming. In this case these conditions are lacking, and their Lordships are unable to think that there has been any misapplication of the principles of law which regulate this question, and the findings of fact are sufficient to defeat the appellant's claim. 5. The second question gives rise to greater difficulty. It appears that Raja Saroda Narain, when he inherited the estate, WHS a minor. The estate was then placed under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that had come to him in circumstances entirely disassociated from the ownership of the Raj. Nor could the monies have been used by him for the purpose of acquiring or endowing an impartible estate. It is therefore a strong assumption to make that the income of the property of this nature is so affected by the source from which it came that it still retains its original character. 7. It is possible that this confusion is due to the consideration of the position with regard to an ordinary joint family estate. In such a case the income, equally with the corpus, forms part of the family property, and if the owner of the estate mixes his own monies with the monies of the family-as, for example, by putting the whole into one account at the ban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rect. Those that came to our hands were entered in our book. What was so entered into the estate account was considered as estate money with the Raja's consent. I can't say if the Raja purchased any landed estate out of the money advanced by him personally. 8. For the reasons already given such a statement is insufficient to affect the property with the character of impartibility. Whether it be possible in any circumstances to treat moveable property as an accretion to a landed estate of this character is a matter not arising for decision. 9. It is true that in Sarabjit Partap Bahadur Sahi v. Indarjit Partap Bahadur Sahi I.L.R. (1904) All. 203 it was decided that moveable property could be so regarded, but as the point does no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
