Hotchpot and partition of Hindu joint family property do not create a gift or registration requirement.

A Hindu coparcener's unilateral act of throwing self-acquired land into the common hotchpot of a joint family does not amount to a transfer. Once the property is impressed with the character of joint family property, its later allotment to sons on partition is not, by itself, a gift. On that reasoning, no duly stamped and registered instrument was required for the transaction, and the requirement of gift treatment was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether throwing a self-acquired plot of land into the common hotchpot of a Hindu joint family and the subsequent allotment of plots to sons at partition amounted to a gift requiring a stamped and registered instrument.

Analysis: A unilateral declaration by a Hindu coparcener throwing self-acquired property into the common stock of the joint family does not amount to a transfer. Once the property is impressed with the character of joint family property, its allotment on partition to the sons does not, by itself, constitute a gift of the property so as to attract the requirement of a duly stamped and registered document.

Conclusion: The transaction did not amount to a gift requiring a stamped and registered instrument. The question was answered in the negative and against the Revenue.

---