Self-acquired property in common hotchpot to be family property: HC

If a member of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF) puts their self-acquired property into the common pot, giving up their individual claim, it becomes a joint property, the Karnataka High Court (HC) has ruled.

While dismissing an appeal by one T Narayana Reddy and another, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice G Basavaraja, said: “Law relating to blending of separate property with those of joint family is well settled. Such an intention can be inferred by the words and if there are no words, then from his conduct.”

Stating that there is a lot of literature in Hindu law which recognises the doctrine of blending of individual’s property into joint families’ so that it becomes the family property for ensuring to the benefit of all its members, the high court also qouoted Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usage. According to Mayne, a property which was originally self-acquired may become joint family property if it has been voluntarily thrown by the owner into the joint stock, with the intention of abandoning all separate claims upon it.

“The subject properties having been put into a common hotchpot eventually resulting into joint family property, the assertion of the appellants that they do not have trappings of ancestral property pales into insignificance,” the HC said in its order.

The case

One Eramma wife of Thimmaiah had bought suit properties vide registered sale deeds dated April 10, 1944; June 10, 1950; and July 12, 1953. Eramma had two sons, Narayana Reddy & Ramaiah, and one daughter Munithayamma. There was a family partition vide registered deed dated July 27, 1970 whereby, these properties were partitioned among the children, Rs 1,000 having been given to Eramma as her share. Suit properties are those that had fallen to the share of Narayana Reddy.

“Partitioning of the self-acquired property amongst all the members of the family by the matriarch raises a very strong presumption as to the subject properties having been put into a common hotchpot and that there is nothing on record to rebut the same. That being the position, there is an eminent case for the invocation of the doctrine of common hotchpot,” the HC said while explaining the type of these properties.