Partial partition of coparcenary property upheld where a father could validly consent for a minor coparcener's interest.

A partial partition of joint family property involving a minor coparcener was treated as legally permissible where the partition was on equal terms. The father, acting as guardian, could validly consent on behalf of the minor because the minor's undivided coparcenary interest was not governed in the same manner as a minor's separate property under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. On that reasoning, sections 6, 8, 11 and 12 did not bar the father from acting in relation to the minor's interest in the coparcenary. The resulting investment in the firm could therefore not be added to the assessee's net wealth on the basis of an invalid partition.

---

---

Issues: Whether a partial partition of joint family property effected by the father on behalf of a minor coparcener was valid, and whether the resulting investment in the firm could be included in the assessee's net wealth.

Analysis: The relevant enquiry was whether the father, as guardian, could validly consent to a partial partition involving the minor's undivided interest in joint family property. The Tribunal considered the divergent High Court views on partial partition and examined the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. It held that the Act does not govern the minor's undivided interest in joint family property in the same manner as a minor's separate property. On that footing, sections 6, 8, 11 and 12 did not disable the father from acting in relation to the minor's interest in the coparcenary. The Tribunal also treated partial partition as legally permissible and found no adverse effect on the minor's interest where the partition was on equal terms.

Conclusion: The partial partition was valid and the father's consent on behalf of the minor was effective in law; the addition made on that basis was not sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Where partial partition is legally recognised, a father managing the minor coparcener's undivided interest in joint family property may validly consent on the minor's behalf, and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 does not bar such consent in relation to that interest.

---