Joint family property and estate duty: retained management does not trigger inclusion where separate property was thrown into hotchpot.

Property voluntarily thrown into the family hotchpot and treated as joint family property cannot be included in the deceased's estate under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 merely because he retained management or enjoyment. A unilateral declaration by a coparcener can impress separate property with the character of joint family property, and once that change occurs the property is no longer capable of being treated as a gift or settlement of disposable separate property. The document also notes that no partition by metes and bounds had taken place, so the deceased retained only an undivided coparcenary interest. Section 10 therefore had no application to the properties in schedules B, C and D.

---

---

Issues: Whether the properties covered by schedules B, C and D were liable to be included in the deceased's estate as property deemed to pass under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

Analysis: The properties in question were originally self-acquired properties of the deceased, but the document of 1949 contained a declaration that they had been thrown into the family hotchpot and treated thereafter as joint family properties. A unilateral declaration by a coparcener is sufficient to impress separate property with the character of joint family property. Once so impressed, the deceased could not validly dispose of such property by gift or settlement in favour of other coparceners, and the recitals reserving management and income to him did not convert the arrangement into a gift attracting section 10. The Court further noted that the document did not effect a partition by metes and bounds, and that the deceased retained only his undivided coparcenary interest in the joint family properties.

Conclusion: Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 had no application, and the properties in schedules B, C and D could not be included in the estate of the deceased as property deemed to pass under that provision.

Ratio Decidendi: Property that has been impressed with the character of joint family property cannot be brought within section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 merely because the father retained management or enjoyment, unless the transaction is in substance a gift or settlement of property capable of being so disposed of.

---