Hindu Joint Family /

Hindu Undivided Family

Prof. (Dr.) Vijender Kumar

Professor of Law & Commonwealth Fellow
Head, Centre for Family Law
NALSAR University of Law, Hyd.
vijenderkumar@yahoo.com

Hindu Joint Family and its Composition

A Hindu Joint Family consists of a common ancestor

and all his lineal male descendants up to any
generation together with the wife or wives (or
widows) and unmarried daughters of the common
ancestor and of the lineal male descendants.
The common ancestor is necessary for bringing a
joint family into existence; for its continuance
common ancestor is not a necessity.
The death of common ancestor does not mean that the
joint family comes to an end.

Common Ancestor
Son

Son

Wife

S
S

S Son
S
Wife

SS S S
S

Wife

D
S

Daughter
(M)

D
Wife

S
S

Daughter

Wife

Son

D Daughter
M Married
# Members of Hindu
Joint Family

Male

Female

Karta/Manager
Coparceners
Members

Hindu Joint Family and its Composition

A Hindu joint family has no legal entity distinct

and separate from that of the members who
constitute it.
Hindu joint family is a unit and in all matters it is
represented by its Karta.
Within its fold no outsider, except by adoption,
can be admitted by agreement or otherwise.
It confers a status on its members which can be
acquired only by birth in the family or by
marriage to a male member.

Presumption of Jointness

The presumption is that the members of a Hindu

Family are living in a state of jointness, unless
contrary is proved.
The normal state of every Hindu Family is that it
is joint family, presumably joint in Food,
Worship and Estate.
This has been an accepted proposition from the
beginning, that every Hindu Family is presumed
to be a joint family. (Jagannath v. Lokanath,
AIR 1981 Ori. 52).

Presumption of Jointness

Normally a joint family is joint in food, worship

and estate, yet if it is not joint in food or worship or
in estate, in any one or all of them, it does not
necessarily imply that it has ceased to be a joint
family.
Where three brothers owning a joint family house
were working at three different places, it was held
that they constituted a joint family; simply because
they are not living jointly does not lead to an
inference that they do not constitute a joint family.
(Kethaperumal v. Rajendra, AIR 1959 Mad. 409).

Common Ancestor
Son

Son

Wife

S
S

DS

S
S

Wife
S S

S
S

Daughter

Wife
D

Wife
S
Wife

SS S S
S

S
S

Son

Wife

D
S

Daughter
(M)

Presumption of Jointness

There is no presumption that joint family

possesses joint property. (K.O.Reddy v.
V.N.Reddy, AIR 1984 SC 1171.
There is no presumption that the property held
by a member of joint family or a business
conducted by a coparcener is joint family
business.
In Hindu law existence of joint property is not a
condition precedent to the existence of joint
family.

Joint Hindu Family and

Hindu Undivided Family
In the Revenue Statutes, the expression Hindu
Undivided Family has been used. This appears
slightly different from the term Joint Hindu
Family under Hindu Law.
The Indian Income Tax Act 1961 defines a
person to include, inter alia, a Hindu
Undivided Family.
A Hindu Undivided Family is a taxable unit for
the purposes of income tax.

Joint Hindu Family and

Hindu Undivided Family

The expression Hindu Undivided Family

finds reference in various provisions of the Act
but this expression is not defined in the Act the
reason for the omission according to the
Supreme Court is that the expression has a wellknown connotation under Hindu law and being
aware of it, the legislature did not want to define
the expression separately in the Act.

Joint Hindu Family and

Hindu Undivided Family

In Commr. of Income Tax v. Arun Kumar

Jhunjhunwala (1997) 223 ITR 45, the Court held that the
expression Hindu Undivided Family must be
construed in the sense in which it is understood
Hindu joint family under Hindu law.
In N.V.Narendra Nath v. Commr. of Wealth Tax
AIR 1970 SC 14, the Supreme Court held that there is
nothing in the scheme of the Wealth Tax Act also to
suggest that it is different than Joint Hindu Family
and therefore a Joint Hindu Family and Hindu
Undivided family are synonymous terms.

Joint Hindu Family and

Hindu Undivided Family

In Commr. of Income Tax v. Madan Lal

Parikh 2002 (123) Taxman 603; 2002 (175)
CTR 277, the Rajasthan High Court made an
interesting observation : there is no such thing
as HUFs property. In fact the subject index of
Mullas Hindu Law which deals with nearly
every matter discussed in the book does not
refer to any such thing as HUF or the Hindu
Undivided Family much less property
belonging to such a family.

Joint Hindu Family and

Hindu Undivided Family

In Surjeet v. W.T.Commr, AIR 1976 SC 109,

the Supreme Court said that the expression
Hindu Undivided Family in the Wealth Tax Act
is used in the sense a Hindu Joint Family is
understood in the Hindu law and a Joint Family
may consist of a single male member and his
wife and daughters and there is nothing in the
scheme of the Wealth Tax Act to suggest that a
Hindu Undivided Family as assessable unit must
consist of at least two male members.

Differences between the two

The presumption under Hindu law is that every

Hindu family is presumed to be a Joint Hindu
Family until contrary is proved. There is no such
assumption under the Taxation laws for a Hindu
family.

Under Hindu law though there is a presumption that

every Hindu family is a joint family there is no
presumption that it owns joint family property.
Therefore, under Mitakshara Hindu law there can be
a joint family without joint family property.

Differences between the two

The concept of Hindu Undivided Family under the

revenue laws is linked only with the property.
The concept of a Hindu Undivided Family without
owning any property is meaningless as far as its
assessment is concerned.
Under Hindu law, a son in the womb of his mother
in many aspects is treated as equal to a son in
existence. He can also restrict the rights of a sole
surviving coparcener to alienate the property, yet
for the purposes of revenue laws, such a son is not
taken into cognizance till he is actually born alive.

Differences between the two

The very purpose for which the expression Hindu

Joint Family or Hindu Undivided Family is
understood by these two legal branches, viz., the
revenue authorities and Hindu law, are different.
The importance of the difference lies in the fact
that for the purposes of tax a person will be
allowed a larger exemption if he is taxed as the
manager of a Joint Hindu Family than, if he is
taxed as an individual. (Commr. of Income Tax,
Bombay v. Gomedalli Lakshmi Narayan AIR
1935 Bom. 412).

Differences between the two

For imposition of tax, whether a person is to be

assessed as an individual or as the Karta of a
HUF is the primary consideration. If the money
is spent for the maintenance of a HUF member
that can be shown as an expense of the HUF.
Thus this remains the focal point of inquiry
whenever there is an examination of the
character of the family for revenue purposes.
All other considerations are subsidiary.

Karta

Who can be a Karta?

Father- so long he is alive, after his death it passes to the
senior most male member.
Uncle- if coparcenary consists of uncle and nephews.
Elder brother- if coparcenary consists of brothers.
Junior most male member- the junior member owes his
appointment to the agreement or consent of the coparceners.
Coparceners may withdraw their consent any time.
More than one Karta- there can be more than one Karta.
Female member as Karta- female member cannot be a
Karta of the Hindu Joint Family. (Commr. of Income-Tax
v. Seth Govind Ram, AIR 1966 SC 2).

Female member as Karta

In Kesheo v. Jagannath, AIR 1926 Nag. 81, the Court

held the view that mother, though not a coparcener,
can be, in the absence of adult male members, Karta
of the joint family, and her acts will be binding on
others as that of a Karta.

Ratio of the case: that any adult members may be

the manager of the joint family, and in case of need a
step-mother could bind her step-son, who was a
minor, by alienation of the joint family property, in
whatever character she purported to act.

Female member as Karta

In Gangoli v. H.K.Channappa, AIR 1983 Kant. 222,

the Karnataka High Court expressed the view that
the mother as natural guardian of her minor sons
can manage the joint family property and
appointment of a guardian by Court will not be
justified.
This is obviously the situation where father is
dead and there is no adult male member.

Female member as Karta

In Commr. of Income-Tax v. Seth Govind Ram, AIR 1966

SC 2, the Supreme Court after reviewing the authorities,
took the view that the mother or any other female could not
be the Karta of the joint Hindu family and therefore cannot
alienate joint family property.
This is in acceptance with the text of Hindu law.
According to Hindu sages (authorities) only a coparcener
can be a Karta.
Since females cannot be coparcener, they cannot be the
Karta of the joint Hindu family.

Karta

Position of a Karta in the Hindu joint Family:

Relationship between Karta and the other members of the
family are not:
- that of Principal or agent;
- that of manager (commercial firm);
Karta:
head of the family;
act on behalf of other members;
Partner: he is not like a partner;
Power: his powers are almost unlimited;
Trustee: he is not a trustee;
Reward: no reward for his services.

Karta

Rights/Powers of the Karta:

right of management;
right to see the income;
right to representation of the family in:
legal matters;

social matters;

religious matters etc.

right of compromise;
right to refer a dispute for arbitration;
right of acknowledgment;
right to contract debts;
loan on promissory notes;
right to enter into contract etc.