Notional partition under Hindu succession law cannot be treated as an actual family partition without a lawful coparcenary division.

A release deed could not create a valid partial partition of a Hindu undivided family business between a mother and her minor son where no partition between coparceners had legally occurred. The Explanation to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 creates only a notional partition to determine the deceased coparcener's share for succession; it does not effect an actual division among surviving members. A mother or wife has no independent right to insist on partition by metes and bounds in the absence of a coparcenary partition. On these facts, the deed did not bring about a legally effective partition, and the issue was answered against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether a valid partial partition was effected, by the release deed dated 11 September 1961, between the mother and the minor son in respect of the Hindu undivided family business.

Analysis: The business formed part of the Hindu undivided family property, and after the death of the coparcener the rights in that property had to be worked out under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The concept of a notional partition under the Explanation to Section 6 operates only to ascertain the deceased coparcener's share for succession. It does not create an actual partition between the surviving members. A wife or mother has no independent right under the Hindu law as applied here to insist on a partition by metes and bounds in the absence of a partition between coparceners. On the facts, the surviving coparcener and the mother could not bring about a legally effective partition of the family business by the recitals in the release deed.

Conclusion: No valid partition was effected between the mother and the minor son, and the question was answered in the negative, in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: The Explanation to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is a limited fiction for determining the deceased coparcener's share and cannot be extended to treat a recital as an actual partition where no partition between coparceners in law has taken place.

---