"A" as managing member of joint Hindu family borrowed Rs. 5000/- from "B" for the necessities of the joint family. "B" obtained the decree against "A" as manager of the joint family. Could the decree be executed against the whole coparcenary property? Could the decree be executed against personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family? Decide giving reason.

Question: "A" as managing member of joint Hindu family borrowed Rs. 5000/- from "B" for the necessities of the joint family. "B" obtained the decree against "A" as manager of the joint family. Could the decree be executed against the whole coparcenary property? Could the decree be executed against personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family? Decide giving reason. [DJS 1982]

Find the question and answer of Hindu Law only on Legal Bites. ["A" as managing member of joint Hindu family borrowed Rs. 5000/- from "B" for the necessities of the joint family. "B" obtained the decree against "A" as manager of the joint family. Could the decree be executed against the whole coparcenary property? Could the decree be executed against personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family? Decide giving reason.]

Answer

The Hindu Law is a very ancient and complicated body of law. It is a personal law which governs the Hindus in India. The Hindu Law is divided into two parts, namely the Mitakshara Law and the Dayabhaga Law. The Mitakshara Law is applicable in most of India, while the Dayabhaga Law is applicable in West Bengal, Assam and Tripura. The Hindu Law is based on the ancient legal texts known as the Dharmashastras. Hindu Law is mainly concerned with the law of succession and inheritance, marriage and divorce, and other matters related to the personal status of an individual.

Joint Hindu Family

A joint Hindu family is a special type of family structure recognized by Hindu Law. It is a form of family organization where two or more members of the same family are members of the same coparcenary and share the same ancestral property. The property held by a joint Hindu family is known as joint family property. The members of a joint Hindu family are known as coparceners. The head of the family is known as the Karta, who is responsible for managing the affairs of the family. The other members of the family are known as coparceners and are entitled to a share in the ancestral property.

Decree against A as manager of the Joint Family

In the given case, A as a managing member of the joint Hindu family has borrowed Rs. 5000/- from B for the necessities of the joint family. B has obtained a decree against A as manager of the joint family. The question is whether the decree can be executed against the whole coparcenary property or against the personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family.

Execution of Decree against Whole Coparcenary Property

The decree obtained by B against A as manager of the joint family can be executed against the whole coparcenary property. This is because, according to Hindu Law, the Karta of a joint Hindu family has the authority to bind the coparcenary property to any third party. This is known as the doctrine of "binding of the coparcenary property by Karta".

Thus, B can execute the decree against the whole coparcenary property

Execution of Decree against Personal Separate Properties of All the Members of the Joint Family

However, the decree obtained by B against A as manager of the joint family cannot be executed against the personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family. This is because, according to Hindu Law, the personal separate properties of the members of a joint Hindu family are not liable for the debts of the coparcenary. This is known as the doctrine of "non-liability of personal separate properties of the coparceners".

Thus, B cannot execute the decree against the personal separate properties of all the members of the joint family.

There are several landmark cases of the Supreme Court of India that have dealt with the limitation on the power of the Karta to alienate coparcenary property. Some of these cases include:

Prakash v. Phulavati (2016) - In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) does not have an absolute power to alienate coparcenary property and that such alienation would be invalid if it is not for the benefit of the coparcenary.

Danamma @ Suman Surpur v. Amar (2018) - In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the coparcenary property cannot be alienated by the Karta without the consent of all the coparceners, except in cases where the alienation is for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate.

Gudipudi Sriramulu v. Gudipudi Venkateswarlu (2018) - In this case, the Supreme Court held that the Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) does not have an absolute power to alienate coparcenary property and that the alienation would be void if the same is not for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate.

These are just a few examples of landmark cases that have dealt with the limitation on the power of the Karta to alienate coparcenary property. They have established that Karta does not have an absolute power to alienate coparcenary property and that such alienation would be invalid if it is not for the benefit of the coparcenary.

Further, the Supreme Court of India has discussed the issue of a Karta's inability to execute a decree against the personal separate properties of all members of a joint Hindu family. In the case of Raghunathrao Ganpatrao v. Raghunath Vithal, AIR 1978 SC 1479, the court held that the Karta of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) does not have the authority to execute a decree against the personal separate properties of all members of the joint family. The court stated that the personal separate properties of the coparceners are not liable to be attached and sold in execution of a decree obtained against the Karta or any other coparcener in respect of a debt contracted by him as Karta or as a coparcener. The court further stated that the coparceners' personal properties cannot be proceeded against in execution of a decree obtained against the HUF or the Karta or any other coparcener in respect of a debt contracted by him as Karta or as a coparcener.

Hindu Law – Notes, Case Laws, And Study Material

Test Series for Competitions