The Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975*
(Act 30 of 1976 amended by Act 15 of 1978)
An Act to abolish the joint family system among Hindus in the state of Kerala.
Preamble:- Whereas it is expedient to abolish the joint family system among Hindus in the state of Kerala
Be it enacted in the Twenty-Sixth Year of the Republic of India as follows:-
1. Short title, extent and commencement –
(1) The Act may be called the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975.
(2) It extends to the whole State of Kerala.
**(3) It shall come into force on such date as the Government may, by notification the Gazette, appoint.
2. Definition – In this Act, “joint Hindu family” means any Hindu family with community of property and includes-
*The above Act received the assent of the President on the 10th day of August, Kerala Gazette,Extraordinary No.484, dated 17.8.1976.
**The Act came into force on 1-12-1976 as per notification No. 17469/Leg (A)2/69 Law, dated 18.11.76 S.R.O. 1185/76. K.G.No. 46, dated 23.11.1976.
(1) a tarward or tavazhi governed by
the Madras Marumakkattayam Act, 1932, the
Travancore Nayar Act, II of 1100, the
Travancore Ezhava Act III of 1100, the
Nanjinad Vellala Act of 1101, the
Travancore kshatriya Act of 1108, the
Travancore krishnavaka Marumakkattayam
Act, VII of 1115, the Cochin Nayar Act
XXXIX of 1113, or the Cochin
Marumakkattayam Act, XXXIII of 1113;
(2) a kutumba or kavaru governed by Madras Aliyasantana Act, 1949;
(3) an illom governed by the Kerala Nambudiri Act, 1958; and
(4) an undivided Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law.
3. Birth in family not to give rise to right in property –
On and after the commencement of this Act no right to claim any interest in any property of an ancestor during his or her lifetime which is founded on the mere fact that the claimant was born in the family of the ancestor shall be recognized in any court.
(4) Joint tenancy to be replaced by tenancy in common —
(1) All members of an undivided Hindu family governed by the Mitakshara law holding any coparcenary property on the day this Act comes into force shall with effect from that day, be deemed to hold it as tenants-in-common as if a partition had taken place among all the members of that undivided Hindu family as respects such property and as if each one of them is holding his or her share separately as full owner thereof;
Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall affect the right to maintenance or the right to marriage or funeral expenses out of the coparcenary property or the right to residence, if any, if the members of an undivided Hindu family, other than persons who have become entitled to hold their shares separately, & any such right can be enforced if this Act had not been passed.
(2) All members of a joint Hindu family, other than an undivided Hindu family referred to in sub-section (1), holding any joint family property on the day of this Act comes into force, shall, with effect from that day be deemed to hold it as tenants-in-common, as if a partition of such property per capita had taken place among all the members of the family living on the day aforesaid, whether such members were entitled to claim such partition or not under the law applicable to them, and as i.e. each one of the members is holding his or her share separately as full owner thereof.
NOTES
By virtue of this Act the joint family system of the Marumakkattayam Tarwad stood abolished by the operation of law and the properties of the joint family are held thereafter by the members of the joiint family as tenants-in-common as if there was a partition.
If under the custom, a female is entitled to ask for partition or is granted a share in the property in lieu of her right to maintenance, or marriage expenses, then only she is entitled to a share in the property.2 Where there was a partition in a joint family consisting of the asessee, his wife and son prior to the coming into force of this Act, it was held that the property held by the assessee was his individual property and the wife is not entitled to any share in it. Therefore, the entire income from the property in the hands of the assessee is to be assessed in his hand as an individual.
After passing of Joint Family Abolition Act, 1975, section 17 of the Hindu Succession Act does not become inoperative in respect of persons living on 18.6.1956 (Date of coming into force of Hindu Succession Act) and who died after the passing of Joint Family Abolition Act on 1.12.1976. It also does not become inoperative in respect of persons who were born on or after 18.6.1956 but before 1.12.1976 and who died on or after that date.
5. Rule of pious obligations of Hindu son abrogated.-
(1) After the commencement of this Act, no court shall, save as provided in sub-sections (2) recognize any right to proceed against a son, grandson or great-grandson for the recovery of any debt due from his father, grandfather or great grandfather or any alienation of property in respect of or in satisfaction of any such debt on the ground of the pious obligation under the Hindu law, the son, grandson or great grandson to discharge any such debt.
(2) In the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of this Act, nothing contained in sub-section(1) shall affect-
(a) the right of any creditor to proceed against the son, grandson or great grandson, as the case may be; or
(b) any alienation made in respect of or in satisfaction of, any such debt, and any such right or alienation shall be enforceable under the rule of pious obligation in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable if this Act had not been passed.
Explanation- For the purposes of sub-section (2), the expression “son”, “grandson” or “great grandson” shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson or great grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of this Act.
The expression “Hindu Law” in this section has to be understood in a broad sense as including Marumakkattayam Law which is also part of Hindu Law.
6. Liability of members of joint Hindu family for debts contracted before Act not affected –
Where a debt binding on a joint Hindu family has been contracted before the commencement of this Act by Karnavan, Yejman, Manager or Karta, as the case may be, of the family, nothing herein contained shall affect the liability of any member of the family to discharge any such debt and any such liability may be enforced against all or any of the members liable, therefore, in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable if this Act had not been passed.
7. Repeal.-
(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, any text, rule or interpretation of Hindu law or any custom or usage part of that law in force immediately before the commencement of this Act shall cease to have effect with respect to any matter for which provision is made in this Act.
(2) The Acts mentioned in the schedule, in so far as they apply to the whole or any part of the State of Kerala, are hereby repealed.
8. Proclamation IX of 1124 and Act XVI 1961 to continue in force
Notwithstanding any thing contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, Proclamation (IX of 1124) dated 29th June, 1949, promulgated by the Maharaja of Cochin, as amended by the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilakam Estate and the Palace Fund (Partition) and Act, the Kerala Joint Hindu Family system (Abolition)Amendment Act 1978 and the valiamma Thampuron Kovilakam Estate and Palace Fund(Partition)5 1961 (16 of 1961), as amended by the said Act, shall continue to be in force and shall apply to the Valiamma Thampuran Kovilakam Estate & the Palace Fund administered by the Board of Trustees appointed under section 3 of the said proclamation.
The Schedule
[See section 7(2)
Acts repealed
(1) The Madras Marumakkathayam Act, 1932 (XXII of 1933);
(2) The Madras Aliyasantana Act, 1949(IX of 1949);
(3) The Travancore Nayar Act, II of 1100;
(4) The Travancore Ezhava Act, III of 1100;
(5) The Nanjinad Vallala Act of 1101 (VI of 1101);
(6) The Travancore Kshatriya Act of 1108, (VII of 1108);
(7) The Travancore Krishnavaka Marumakkathayee Act, (VII of 1115);
(8) The Cochin Thiyya Act, VII of 1107;
(9) The Cochin Makkathayam Thiyya Act, XVII of 1115;
(10) The Cochin Nayar Act, XXIX of 1113;
(11) The Cochin Marumakkathayam Act, XXXIII of 1113;
(12) The Kerala Nambudiri Act, 1958 (27 of 1958)
FOOT NOTES
1. WTO v Madhavan Nambiar(K)(1988) 169 ITR 810; CWT v Padmanabhan (PM) (1989) 179 ITR 243.
2. CWT v Padmanabhan (PM)(1989)179 ITR 243;
3. Deputy CAgIT v Chidambaram (RS)(1994) 209 ITR 531(Ker) distinguishing Surjit Lal Chhabda v CIT (1975) 101 ITR 776 (SC): 1976(2) SCR 164; Krishna Prasad (C) v CIT (1974) 97 ITR 493(C); Narendranath (NV) v CWT (1969) 74 ITR 190 (SC): 1970 SC 14: Gowli Bhddanna v CIT (1966) 60 ITR 293 (SC).
4. Chellamma v Narayana 1993 Ker 146 (FB).
5. By section 8 of Valiamma Thampuram Kovilakam Estate and the Palace Fund (Partition) and the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Amendment Act, 1978 (Act 15 of 1978) after section 7 of the Kerala Joint Hindu Family System (Abolition) Act, 1975 (Act 30 of 1976) section 8 was inserted and shall be deemed always to have been inserted.
However in the case of any debt contracted before the commencement of this Act, nothing stated above will affect:-
The right of any creditor to proceed against the son, grandson or great grandson, as the case may be; or
Any alienation made in respect of, or in satisfaction of, any such debt, and any such right or alienation shall be enforceable under the rule of pious obligation in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable if this Act had not been passed
Explanation: The expression “Son”, “grandson” or “great grandson” shall be deemed to refer to the son, grandson, or great grandson, as the case may be, who was born or adopted prior to the commencement of this Act.
Liability of members of joint Hindu family for debts contracted before Act not affected:
Where a debt binding on a joint Hindu Family has been contracted before the commencement of this act by the Karanavan, Yejman, Manager or Kartha, as the case may be, of the family, nothing herein contained shall affect the liability of any member of the family to discharge any such debt and any such liability may be enforced against all or any of the members liable therefore in the same manner and to the same extent as it would have been enforceable if this Act had not been passed.
The following Acts were repealed :
The Madras Marumakkathayam act, 1932 (XXII of 1933]
The Madras Aliyasanthana Act, (IX of 1949)
The Travancore Nayar Act, II of 1100
The Travancore Ezhava Act, III of 1100
The Nanjinad Vellala Act of 1101 [VI of 1101]
The Travancore Kshatriya Act of 1108 (VII of 1108)
The Travancore Krishnavaka Marumakkathayee Act, (VII of 1115)
The Cochin Thiyya Act, (VII of 1107)
The Cochin Makkathayam Thiyya Act, (XVII of 1115)
The Cochin Nayar Act, (XXIX of 1113)
The Cochin Marumakkathayam Act, (XXXIII of 1113)
The Kerala Nambudiri Act, 1958 (27 of 1958)
I was born on 14.9.1977. Will i be entitled to family property divided as per this act.
The effective date for implementation being 1 /12/1976,question of your being included for right to property as on that date does not arise.However you will be entitled to the share of property inherited by your father or mother as the case may be,along with other heirs to that property shared by the parent.
UNABLE TO DOWNLOAD..PL ADVICE