Severance in status requires clear intention; a partial partition of business assets alone does not disrupt the joint family.

A clear and unequivocal intention is required to sever status and disrupt a Hindu joint family; a mere entry showing division of one business asset does not, by itself, establish partition of the entire family. The account entry relied upon here was treated as evidencing only a partial partition of business interests, because it did not show an intention to divide all assets by metes and bounds or to live separately, and supporting contemporaneous records were absent. On that basis, the joint family was regarded as continuing, and the lineal descendants' share remained aggregable under section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

---

---

Issues: Whether the account entry dated 31-3-1963 evidenced a severance in status and disruption of the joint family so as to prevent aggregation of the lineal descendants' share under section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

Analysis: Severance in status depends on a clear and unequivocal intention to separate, to be gathered from the document and surrounding facts. The entry relied upon showed, at most, division of the business interest in Sri Ramakrishna Silk Palace among the family members. It did not show an intention to disrupt the entire joint family, to live separately, or to divide all assets by metes and bounds. The absence of similar contemporaneous family records, the non-production of the alleged partition recognition materials, and the character of the entry as one made in a third party's books supported the view that only a partial partition of business assets had taken place. The earlier Tribunal decisions cited were distinguished on facts because those documents contained express recitals of dissension and a clear intention to partition the family.

Conclusion: The entry did not bring about severance in status. The joint family continued to exist, and the lineal descendants' share remained liable to aggregation under section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

Ratio Decidendi: A partial partition of some family assets does not by itself effect a severance in status; only a clear and unequivocal intention to separate from the joint family, established on the facts of the case, brings about disruption of the joint family.

---