Statutory fiction in sthanam property devolution limits tax recovery to the deceased's estate through valid legal representatives.

A statutory fiction under section 7(3) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 treats sthanam property as divided per capita immediately before the sthanamdar's death, so the tarwad members take as co-owners and the personal heirs receive only the deceased's notional share. The discussion also notes that agricultural income-tax and penalty attributable to the deceased sthanamdar are recoverable only from the estate through legal representatives, and only to the extent the estate can answer the liability. An assessment against an alleged successor sthanamdar, without valid representative capacity or proper impleadment of the deceased's estate representatives, is not valid.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, on the death of a sthanamdar, the sthanam property devolved on the members of the tarwad as co-owners under the statutory fiction in section 7(3) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or on the personal heirs alone; (ii) whether the arrears of agricultural income-tax and penalty assessed in respect of the deceased sthanamdar could be realised from the receivers or from the estate in their hands.

Issue (i): Whether, on the death of a sthanamdar, the sthanam property devolved on the members of the tarwad as co-owners under the statutory fiction in section 7(3) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or on the personal heirs alone.

Analysis: Section 7(3) creates a fiction that, on the death of a sthanamdar after the commencement of the Act, the sthanam property is to be treated as divided per capita immediately before death among the sthanamdar and all members of his family then living. The members of the tarwad take their shares as co-owners and not as heirs of the deceased sthanamdar. The personal heirs inherit only the one share that the deceased is deemed to have received immediately before death. The later 1958 enactment could not affect the devolution because the sthanam had already come to an end on the death of the sthanamdar.

Conclusion: The property devolved on the tarwad members as co-owners, with the personal heirs entitled only to the deceased's notional share.

Issue (ii): Whether the arrears of agricultural income-tax and penalty assessed in respect of the deceased sthanamdar could be realised from the receivers or from the estate in their hands.

Analysis: The income from the sthanam property was the exclusive income of the deceased sthanamdar for the relevant period, so the tax liability was his. Under section 24(1) of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, the legal representative is liable only out of the estate of the deceased and only to the extent the estate can meet the charge. The assessment on the alleged successor sthanamdar was not in accordance with law, because he never became the sthanamdar, the estate representatives of the deceased were not made parties, and no valid assessment could be fastened on him as successor or as representative of the entire body of successors.

Conclusion: The arrears could not be recovered from the receivers merely on the footing of the impugned assessment, and the assessment was invalid.

Final Conclusion: The Court held that the tax liability attached to the deceased sthanamdar's estate only through the legal representatives to the extent permitted by law, and the impugned demand could not be enforced against the receivers; the appeal therefore failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory fiction of per capita devolution treats the tarwad members as co-owners on the death of a sthanamdar, and agricultural income-tax arrears of the deceased can be recovered only from the estate through validly impleaded legal representatives, not by an assessment on an alleged successor who had no lawful representative capacity.

---