https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291830 The court affirmed that the sons and grandsons of the manager of a joint Hindu family were under a pious obligation to pay a debt incurred by him, even though legal necessity for the debt was not proven. The judgment emphasized the religious duty of Hindu sons to discharge their father's debts, enforceable to the extent of the joint family property in their possession. The court rejected arguments of separation and fraudulent partition decree, clarifying that the obligation extends to all Hindu sons irrespective of family composition or the father's managerial role. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the pious obligation despite the lack of legal necessity for the debt. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2020 18:20:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291830 The court affirmed that the sons and grandsons of the manager of a joint Hindu family were under a pious obligation to pay a debt incurred by him, even though legal necessity for the debt was not proven. The judgment emphasized the religious duty of Hindu sons to discharge their father's debts, enforceable to the extent of the joint family property in their possession. The court rejected arguments of separation and fraudulent partition decree, clarifying that the obligation extends to all Hindu sons irrespective of family composition or the father's managerial role. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the pious obligation despite the lack of legal necessity for the debt. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Dec 1932 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291830