LexCOMMR. OF WEALTH TAX, MADRAS & ORS. versus LATE R. SRIDHARAN BY L.RS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
478
A
COMMR. OF WEALTH TAX, MADRAS & ORS.
v.
LATE R. SRIDHARAN BY L.Rs.
April 29. 1976
,B . [A. N. RAY. C.J .• 1\1. H. BEG, R. s. SARKARlA, P. N. SIIJSGAL Atf[)
JASWANT SINGH, JJ.l
~D
,E
:F
~G
Special 11.14rr1ag6.A.ct, 1954, Sec. 21-.Marriage betweell llindu assesue !I."'cl
Cl1ristian female-Whether issue is a Hindu governed by Hindu Law .
. The late' R. Sridharan married Rosa Maria. Steinbichler, a christi:tn of
Austrian descent. under the Special M:.rriage Act. 1954 and a son Nicolu
Sundaram was born out of the . wedlock. In the assessment proceedin.gs in
respect of income tax, wealth ta:t and expenditure tax. Sridharan claimed t<>
be assessed in the status of a member of Hindu Undivided F;unily consisting
of himself and his son, contending that n.c prop<:rty held by him wa.~ ancestral
and Nicolas Sundaram was a Hindu. The officers dealing with these taxes
rejected the contention and assessed him as :m "individual" on the ground
that succession to the property of a person married under the Special Marriage
Act, 1954, is governed by the Indian Succession. Act, 1925 and not by ordin:u-y
Hindu Law and Nicolas Sundaram could not become a member of Hindu
Undivided Family with his father. These orders were affirmed by the Appellate
Assistant Commission··• ~rJ the Appellate Tribunal in appeals by Sridiur:m
against the assessmen<:;.
On further app!ications made by
Sridharan,
!he
Income Tax Appellate Tnounal referred the matter to the Hi~=:h Court which
decided in favour of Srldharan but Jrr<Ultcd a certificate of fitness. Meanwhile,
Sridharan died, and his widow filed wealth tax returns, claiming the s::ttw
of a member of Hindu Undivided Family. The Revenue authorities followed
th-eir earlier decisions, and ultimately the matter was referred to the High Cowt
which decided in favour of respondent Mrs. Sridharan, but granted leave to
· appeal to this Court.
·
· Dismissing the appeals, the Court,
HELD : {l) Under the codifying Acts, the orthodox concept of the crm
"Hindu" has undergone a radie3l change ,and it has been given an extended
meanin.e;. The Acts not only apply to Hindus but also to a lar~e number liilf ·
other persons. Any child legitimate or illegitimate, one of whose parents is
a Hindu by religion and who is brought up as a Hindu, is a Hindu. [478D-EI
(2) Section 21 of the ·special Marriage Act has no bearing on the present
case. The section does not in any ow'ay impair or alter the joint family s~ructure
between an assessee and his son. Nor docs it affect the discretion vested in
a Hindu a~sessee to treat his properties as joint family properti<!s by taking
· into his fo1d his Hindu sons so as to constitute: joint family prbpertics .. [H9A-C]
Slrasiri Yagnapurushdasii & ·ors. v. Muldas Bhundardas Vaislzya and A"r.,.
AIR 1966 S.C. J119; Blzagwan Koa v. J. C. Bose & Ors. (1904) ILR 31 C::.l.
11; Lint:appa v. Emdasan (1904) 27 MaJ. 13;1\.fotlrey Anja Ratna Raja Kumar
v. Koney Narayana Rao & Ors. AIR 1953 SC 433 and Ananthaya v. Vi_,rr"u
17 Mad. 160, referrrJ to.
\Yebstc"rs' 3rd New Jnternat:onal Dictionary cf the Enyli-;h
Lnn~c::,gc;
Encyclopaedia Britannica (15th Edn.): Gitarahasya by n. G. Ti!~,k l'ri::ctpks
of Hindu Law (14th Edn.) pp. 671 and chap. I para 6 by. :\f:rlla, and lii::h
Law & Usage (ltth"EJa.) pp. 2_90 by 1\Iayne, rcf~rred to.·
CML APPELLATE JURisnrcno:-l': Civil Appeal Nos. 1399 to 14.03
of 1970.
·
·
..
. ~
•
.....
~
·
•
•
••
I '
..
C.W.T. v. R. SRIDHARAN (Jaswant Singh, 1.)
479
Appeal from the Judgment and Order dated 20th December f96S
A
of the Madras High Court in Tax Case No. 314/64 (Reference No. 82
.of 1964) and
Civil Appeal No. 301 of 1974
Appeal from the Judgment and order dated 3rd April1972 of the
'Madras .f!igh Coun in Tax Case No. 328 of 1966 (Reference No.
B
~88/66) .
S. T. Desai, 1. Ram.amurthi; for the appellant (In CA 1399-1403
;.
.of 1910).
j
..
$. Swcuninmhan, Mrs. S. Gopalakrislman for the Respondent in all
.the appeals.
c
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
IASWANT SINGH, J.
These ap~ls Nos. 1399 to 1403 of 1970
.and 301 of 1974 by certificates granted by the High Court of Madras
shall be diSposed of together by this judgment as they raise common
question of law and fa~t.
The circumstances giving rise to thes'< appeals are : The late R.
Sridharan along with his father a!J.d brothers constituted a Hindu un-
divided family governed by Mitakshara law. On June 28, 1952, while
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.