9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (12) TMI 53X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ituated in Eluru, West Godavari District. He raised various defences resisting the plaintiff's suit. He contended that the agreement of sale was not true. He further urged that under the contract of sale a sum of ₹ 12,000/- had to be paid in addition to the plaintiff discharging the mortgages due on the property. It was also stated that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform her part of the contract and that specific performance ought not to be decreed. His son, the 2nd defendant, represented by his mother's aunt pleaded that the contract of sale was not for legal necessity and that the contract should not be enforced. He also alleged that there was a prior oral partition between him and his father and that h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akka Balanjaneyulu and other sundry debts and for meeting other family expenses, the terraced house belonging to him and his son was sold. He next invited our attention to partition deed executed between the 1st defendant and his son Rama Rao on 4-11-1935. A reference is made In the partition deed to the mediation effected on 14-9-1955 and the execution of partition lists between the 1st defendant and his son. The house fell to the share of the 1st defendant. Sri Sankara Sastri contended that the father treated the house as joint family property and took the house for his share. The document that was relied on by the plaintiff for proving that the property was the self-acquired property of the father was Exhibit A-14, a mortgage execu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of the self-acquired or separate property into joint family property. No formalities, whatsoever, are required for impressing the self-acquired property with the character of Joint family property. In Subramania Iyer v. Commr. of Income tax 19592 Mad LJ 405 : (AIR 1955 Mad 623) (A), a Bench of the Madras High Court has taken the same view and we agree with that decision. The relevant observations at page 407 (of Mad LJ) : (at p. 624 of AIR) are as follows: Under the Hindu Law there is no necessity for joint family property to exist in order that there may be a joint family. The assessee and his son undoubtedly constitute members of a joint Hindu family. They might have started with no ancestral nucleus or other joint family property b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xhibit A-6 was executed by him for discharging a promissory not debt due to Gandikota Sobhanachlapathi Rao. The amount due under Ex. A-3 was borrowed for discharging debts contracted by him for his daughter's nuptials. The interest due under Ex. A-5 was also included as part of the consideration for Ex. A-4. The contention of Sri Sankara Sastri was that Sitaramamma, for whose marriage the debt was contracted under Ex. A-3, was a minor aged 12 and that the mortgage contravened the provisions of the Child Marriage Restraint Act XIX of 1929. There is no evidence that the mortgage was ever aware that Sitaramamma was a minor. It cannot therefore be said that his object lending the amount was unlawful or that the provisions of the Act were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue to the 3rd defendant. The point urged by Sri Sankara Sastri was that there as no reference to this promissory note debt in the agreement of sale or in the plaint. We are not prepared to take the view that from the omission to refer to this debt in the agreement of sale or in the plaint this debt is not true. It is clear from the records that the father, who is an experienced and clever Karnam, set his wife and son to issue registered notices him so as to avoid the contract of sale. The maintenance suit brought by his wife appears to a collusive one. It is established beyond doubt at the father, the mother and the 2nd defendant are living together and that the oral partition set up by them is absolutely untrue. In the circumstances, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the 2nd defendant. 8. Having carefully perused the Judgment the relevant evidence, we have no doubt that oral partition set up by the appellant is not true. The ration card Ex. A-15 clearly shows that this and defendant and his mother were living with the 1st defendant. The Subordinate Judge has discussed this question in paragraphs 25 to 28 and found that the oral partition is not true. There is, also no force in the contention that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform her part of the contract and that she had not the money to pay in accordance with the terms of the contract. She issued notices to the 1st defendant and even purchased stamp papers for the document being executed. In the plaint, she clearly set out al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
