TMI Blog1965 (9) TMI 6X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an Amarchinta prior to the abolition of the jagirs. She was the jagirdar and, in respect of the income from the jagir, she was being assessed as an individual. On the abolition of the jagirs, the Government determined a certain sum as payable to her for taking over her rights in the jagir, namely, the commutation amount paid to the assessee in instalments spread over a period of 20 years. It may be stated that the last holder of the jagir was Raja Sriram Bhupal, the husband of the assessee, who died on 23rd Thir, 1339F. (May, 1930). The assessee, after the death of her husband, applied to the Atiyat court for the grant of a virasat (succession) to the samasthan of the late Rajah and succession was granted in her name on the 15th Thir 1342F. (May, 1933). Thereafter she applied for permission to adopt a son, on 23rd Amardad, 1344F. (June, 1934), which was granted to her on 17th Jamadi L., 1355 F. (October, 1934). In May, 1939, she adopted a son to her late husband and intimated the same to the Government. The Government approved the adoption, under the Firman of H.E.H. the Nizam on 13th Khurdad, 1352 F. (April, 1942). Before the Wealth-tax Officer, the assessee made a claim that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied amounts or annuity from a trust in which the beneficiary had no other interest whatsoever and, to receive these payments or the right thereof, the beneficiary was precluded from negotiating, encumbering or disposing of in any manner and that, in computing the net wealth, the value of all assets which included rights to receive any annuity or any amount had to be included. As against this order, an appeal, was filed before the Appellate Tribunal, before which it was contended that, since the samasthan was granted to the assessee for the benefit of the family and was for perpetuity, the assessment should have been made in the status of a Hindu undivided family. It was further contended that it was wrong to think that the future amounts receivable by the assessee from the jagir administrator towards compensation for the acquisition of the jagir by the Government constituted wealth, and as such its value might be deleted from the total wealth of the assessee. The Tribunal rejected these contentions. At the very outset, Mr. Subbarayudu, the learned counsel for the applicant, stated that, inasmuch as some relief was granted to the applicant, he is not going to press the second q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... still it depends entirely on my wish to confirm or refuse from doing so any State grant possessed by the deceased jagirdar on any person, whether he be an heir of the deceased jagirdar or not. It always pleased me to open out in some way or the other, means of livelihood for the surviving members of old families. Such sympathetic considerations however cannot permit : (1) The sale or mortgage in any shape, or the division and mutual distribution of any jagir or inam granted by the State unless with the due sanction of the Government ; (2) any adoption or will by a jagirdar made without the special sanction of Government and with the object of ensuring transfer of the State grant into the possession of some person after the said jagirdar's death ; (3) the action of a jagirdar in leaving after him the jagir encumbered with debts borrowed during his lifetime without the knowledge and specific sanction of Government..." In Sikandar Jehan Begum v. Andhra Pradesh State Government, Gajendragadkar J. (as he then was), speaking for the court, observed at page 227 thus : " The legal nature of the jagir estate has been considered by the High Court in dealing with the writ petition f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. The next question mooted is that the Nizam having permitted the adoption and having sanctioned the adoption of Raja Sombhupal, he must be deemed to be the karta of the joint family to which the asset belongs. It is also contended by Mr. Subbarayudu that, since the Nizam, when he granted succession, granted it in the case of Hindu families to benefit the joint families, Raja Sombhupal must be deemed to be the recipient of the asset as belonging to the joint family of himself and his mother, Bhagya Laxmamma. It may be of interest to note that the return by the assessee was made by Sri Raja Sombhupal as karta of the undivided family of Rani Bhagya Laxmamma of Amarchinta Samsthan. It is difficult to understand how an adopted son who, if the notions of ordinary Hindu law are applied, is actually the head and karta of the joint family, is said to be the head and karta of the joint family of his mother. A mother can never be a coparcener of a Hindu joint family. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Seth Govindram Sugar Mills resolved a conflict of decisions of the High Courts of this country by accepting the view expressed by the Madras High Court, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter his death, and divests his adoptive mother of the estate, it is only in respect of non-Atiyat property ; in so far as the Atiyat property is concerned, unless the widow surrenders any jagir and asks for and obtains sanction for the grant to be made in favour of her adopted son, the adopted son has no right to the jagir. Mr. Subbarayudu sought to put forward the analogy of the succession of Wanaparthy Samasthan, forgetting that in that case on the death of the father leaving two sons and while succession proceedings were pending, the eldest son died, leaving a minor son, so that the contest for succession was between the uncle and the nephew. It was sought to be contended in that case that the principle of lineal primogeniture adopted in impartible zamindaris applied to the jagirs in Hyderabad and that the son of the eldest son of the late Rajah should succeed to the exclusion of the uncle. The Nizam, besides giving a quietus to the theory of application of the principle of lineal primogeniture, sanctioned the estate in the name of the nephew as the holder with a grant of haq-e-inthezam of 4 annas and dividing the other 12 annas equally between the two, the uncle and the neph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill, thereby making a particular person to get beneficial possession of the Crown grant without the sanction of the Government or to permit the jagirdar to incur debts without the knowledge and specific sanction of the Government. The learned counsel also cited two other cases, Ramachandar Narayana v. Bhagvan Saheb and Dattatric Rao v. Dhoode Pant, the English translations of which have been furnished to us. The first of the decisions does not narrate the full facts as to how the questions arose ; whether at the opening of the succession or after the jagir has been granted to any particular person that the other members of the family claimed a share therein. At any rate, this very decision holds categorically that to make two persons in a single jagir to be the holders will not be correct in principle under the existing rules and circulars. Again it says : " When the succession of Vithal Narayan is under our consideration, then we cannot be affected to any extent by the intermediate arrangements as the proceedings of the succession were as a matter of fact to be started in 1319F. These are the arrangements of 1320F." In the second of the cases, all that was decided therein was that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
