1981 (7) TMI 117

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d before the Asstt. CED that only half the share of the deceased in the joint family properties passed on his death. The Asstt. CED, however, rejected the accountable person's claim on the ground that under s. 12 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 and under cl. (c) to the proviso the adoption would not divest the estate vested in the deceased. He held that the properties claimed to be joint properties passed on his death. On appeal the Appl. CED held that the claim of the accountable person that so far as the properties other than the agricultural lands and the houses at Yanamadla and a tiled house at Cloth Bazar were concerned they belonged to the HUF consisting of the deceased and his adopted son and consequently only half o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the adoption would not have the effect of divesting any person of any estate vesting in him before the adoption. In the commentary to proviso (c) in the Mulla's Hindu Law, 14th Edition at page 1001 the following passage appears: The proviso (c) to the present section (which must be r/w the relevant provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956) lays downs the express and explicit rule that the adoption of a son or a daughter by a male or female Hindu is not to result in the divesting of any estate vested in any person prior to the adoption. The rule laid down in the proviso does not, however, abrogate the incidents of joint family property as will be seen from the illustrations below. Nor d....