PROJECT ON

KARTA: ITS POWER AND LIMITATIONS

Submitted by

PRAKHAR BHATT

Reg. No. BA0150030

Under the Guidance of

Mr. Ansari
Assistant Professor

TAMIL NADU NATIONAL LAW SCHOOL

(A State University established by Act No. 9 of 2012)
Tiruchirappalli
Tamil Nadu – 620 009
Mr. Ansari
Assistant Professor in Family Law II
Tamil Nadu National Law School
Tiruchirappalli
Tamil Nadu – 620 009

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project work entitled “Karta: its power and
limitations” is a bonafide record of the research work done by Prakhar Bhatt, under
my supervision and guidance. It has not been submitted by any other University for
the award of any degree, diploma, associateship, fellowship or for any other similar
recognition.

Place: Tiruchirappalli

Date:

Signature of the Guide

PRAKHAR BHATT
Tamil Nadu National Law School
Tiruchirappalli
Tamil Nadu – 620 009

DECLARATION

I, Prakhar Bhatt, do hereby declare that the project entitled “Karta: its
power and limitations” submitted to Tamil Nadu National Law School in partial
fulfilment of requirement for award of degree in Under Graduate in Law to Tamil
Nadu National Law School, Tiruchirappalli, is my original research work. It and has
not been formed basis for award of any degree or diploma or fellowship or any other
title to any other candidate of any university.

Counter Signed Signature of the Candidate

Project Guide
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

At the outset, I take this opportunity to thank my Professor Mr. Ansari from the
bottom of my heart who have been of immense help during moments of anxiety and torpidity
while the project was taking its crucial shape.

Secondly, I convey my deepest regards to the Vice Chancellor Mrs.Kamala

Shankaran and the administrative staff of TNNLS who held the project in high esteem by
providing reliable information in the form of library infrastructure and database connections
in times of need.

Thirdly, the contribution made by my parents and friends by foregoing their precious
time is unforgettable and highly solicited. Their valuable advice and timely supervision
paved the way for the successful completion of this project.

Finally, I thank the Almighty who gave me the courage and stamina to confront all
hurdles during the making of this project. Words aren’t sufficient to acknowledge the
tremendous contributions of various people involved in this project, as I know ‘Words are
Poor Comforters’. I once again wholeheartedly and earnestly thank all the people who were
involved directly or indirectly during this project making which helped me to come out with
flying colours.
ABSTRACT

Hindu law holds various unique features with reference to family institutions and the joint
family system is a very important aspect in understanding the functionality of this
mechanism. The joint family has numerous members with each individual owning their
different property rights. Even though the individuality exists, the cohesive structure of the
family comes into the fore with reference to the decisions which are required to be taken by
the family as a whole in various legal and other matters. In such situations, it becomes
exigent that there is one individual who shall head such matters and hold decision making
powers. Such an individual is termed as the Karta.

In the Hindu Undivided Family, the Karta holds a very unique position. This sui
generis nature of the karta is with reference to the varied powers he holds while discharging
his functions as the decision maker in various respects of the family functionality. The karta
is considered to be a person with controlled capacities but within this fringe outline, he holds
an immensely important position of responsibility. The relationship that a karta holds with
other members of the family is not that of trustee or that of a partner or principal. His unique
powers are “very wide and almost sovereign” and thus, its comparison to any partnership or a
principal-agent relationship is naïve. The karta does stand in a fiduciary accord with the rest
of the members of the family but the relationship cannot be termed as that of trusteeship.
Even on the accountability factor, he is not accountable to any member of the family until it
is a matter of misappropriation or fraud.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

1 – To analyse the scope and limitations of the power of karta in a Joint Hindu Family
business?

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the paper is to gain a sufficient knowledge on the powers and their
limitations of a karta in a hindu undivided family and to give a proper insight about the topic.
RESEARCH QUESTION

A critical analysis on the powers and limitations and the role played by karta in hindu
undivided family?

METHODOLOGY

Empirical methodology of research is used in this paper to know the real power of karta in an
undivided hindu family.

LITERATURE REVIEW

1 – WBNUJS LAW JOURNAL.

2 – NLIU LAW JOURNAL.

3 – NLU DELHI LAW JOURNAL.

INTRODUCTION

The joint Hindu family is a patriarchal association and the leader of the family is known as
Karta. He is the senior most male individual from the family and as a head or administrator of
the family, he is the delegate of the family and represents or in the interest of the family. A
Karta is a man in whom, others in the family rest certainty, so between the Karta and the
family individuals there is a fiduciary relationship in light of the fact that there is dependably
a requirement for a supervisor to care for the welfare of minor individuals and females in a
joint Hindu family. Such director of the joint Hindu Family is known as the Karta of family
and he appreciates huge powers in regard of the administration of the issues of family and its
property1.

The situation of Karta in a joint Hindu family is one of a kind. He is that individual who deals
with the entire family and its property and manages it and every one of the individuals from
the family stay in teach under his control and are bound by his choices. A Karta causes
boundless risk and is representative of the family in every one of the issues. It has been said

1
Dr. Diwan Paras, Modern Hindu Law, 16th Edn., Allahabad law agency 290-294.
with respect to the situation of Karta that nobody else is identical to him in the family. The
position and powers are more extensive than anybody2.

WHO CAN BE A KARTA?

With reference to A. Kunjipokkarukutty v. A Ravunni, it was noticed that the in the absence
of the father in the family, it is the doyen i.e. the most senior individual from the family who
is finished up to be the Karta. This conclusion is based upon seniority and the assessment of
alternate individuals does not hold much significance. It must be noticed that a man cannot
turn into the karta until and unless the previous karta is not alive notwithstanding couple of
special cases3.

At the point when the karta gives up his entitlement to deal with the undertakings of the
family because of reasons of his health or because of him being without end, another
individual from the family can be permitted to care for the joint family property with the
assent of every other individual from the family, not really being in a rundown of seniority of
age4.

A point of interest case in such manner is the situation of Nopany Investments (Pvt) Ltd. v.
Santokh Singh wherein the karta of the family was remaining in U.K and couldn't deal with
the property because of the reason of separation and subsequently, with the assent of all his
family individuals, selected his younger sibling as the Karta despite the fact that there were
different individuals who were more older than him. This was held to be legitimate by the
court as it held that under such circumstances, the younger one can be legitimately made the
Karta5.

A karta must be a male part and females can't be the karta of a joint family since they are
non-coparceners and are not permitted to represent the family when all is said in done
circumstances. It was held in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lakshmi Narang that a female

2
Kusum, Family Law Lectures, (2nd Edn. Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2007).
3
Darret J. Duncan M., “Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law”, vol. 2, Universal book and traders 114.
4
Roopa Gargava, “position of karta and the effect of amendment of section 6 of the HSA.
5
Supra, 1.
member can be permitted to be the karta under a few circumstances yet this judgment is held
to be inaccurate due to the non-coparcener angle6.

Concerning the issue if minors can be a karta, it was set up again in Narendra Kumar v. CIT
that if the minor left as the just a single to manage, if under the supervision of a guardian. It
must be noticed that Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 (Section 21) accedes to the legitimacy
of a minor being in a "managerial position" of a Hindu Undivided family.

POSITION OF FEMALE AS A KARTA IN A JOINT HINDU FAMILY

After amendment made by Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, daughter can be
coparcener of HUF like the sons of HUF. After her marriage she progresses toward becoming
member from her spouse's HUF and keeps on being a coparcener of her dad's family. Being a
coparcener, she can likewise look for partition of the home house where the family dwells
and she can likewise dispose of her offer in coparcenary property at her own will. In the event
that a Hindu dies, the coparcener property should be distributed to the daughter as is
designated to son. In the event that a female coparcener passes on before partition, at that
point offspring of such coparcener would be qualified for allocation, accepting a partition had
occurred promptly before her death. A widow of a pre-deceased son despite the fact that
remarried is currently qualified for share in property as legitimate beneficiary of the pre-
deceased son of the family7.

POWERS OF THE KARTA

Family Affairs Management

Being the supreme head of the family, a karta holds the power to take care of the family
matters and the property that belongs with the family. With reference to the instance of
Bhaskaran v. Bhaskaran, it has been held that despite the fact that a Karta's ambit about
property alienation is constrained, his powers in administration of the family undertakings is

6
Supra, 3.
7
Akash Mishra, “karta and his powers: an overview”, vol. 2, 1 (February 2015).
somewhat outright. The karta holds the ability to have the property in totality and be the
beneficiary of the income of HUF independent of its source8.

Likewise, he holds some unique rights like that of the power of eviction in which if there is
some specific part who requests some particular segment of the family property without the
karta consenting to such a request, he can be evicted from that portion. His powers of
administration are considered to be innate and no impedance is to be acknowledged
notwithstanding when he indicates qualities of preference and inclination towards certain
family individuals with reference to maintenance and so forth. This is upon the prudence of
the Karta and this can't be challenged9.

Power to Represent

The Karta is comprehended to be the sole representative of the family structure when it
concerns any legal or even social matters. When a particular suit is documented by the family
in any court, the specific suit is recorded for the sake of the Karta and furthermore when there
is a suit against the family, the particular name is that of the Karta in the court10.

This implies the Karta is obviously a representative of the entire family and the family, in
itself, don't have a specific identity in corporate terms. Thus, when there is one specific
judgment go against the karta, it in totality ties all the current members from the family
despite the fact that they may not be individually dependable in the applicable act. The
expectation from the Karta is that in issues of litigation, he should demonstrate extraordinary
levels of truthfulness and exerton. In the event that because of any such do not have, the
litigation matter is lost, the family can't take up this as a reason for the decree to not be
binding upon them11.

The karta does not have any more prominent interest as they say when contrasted with some
other member of the family yet attributable to his situation as the karta, he holds an ability to
dispose property. With reference to minor in the joint family, it must be comprehended that
when the manager makes a contract with an outside gathering and amid that time, one of the
members of the family has not achieved majority, the contract can't be esteemed to tie on the
minor. This rule is from the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and is relevant here too for the minor

8
Supra, 5.
9
Supra, 4.
10
Darret J. Duncan M., “Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law”, vol. 2, Universal book and traders 117.
11
Ibid.
for the contracts identifying with purchasing of immoveable property and additionally to
contracts made by the Karta for necessities12.

Power over Income

The managerial part of the karta orders the karta, the aspect of controlling his income and
expenditure and if there exists any surplus in the family accounts, he has control over those
accounts as well. On the off chance that the karta has expenses which the other family
individuals don't consent to, at that point these individuals have the choice of requesting a
partition and the karta needs to fit their offer including the sum they considered to have been
improperly spent. It was noted in Tara chand v. Reeb Ram that while taking accounts amid
the division of property, no coparcener must have a charge against him of the method of
reasoning that inferable from his larger family prerequisites, a more prominent share of the
joint family sum was spent on his own family13.

Power of Alienation

Neither the karta nor some other co-parcener has the right to alienate the joint property of the
family yet in extraordinary circumstances wherein the alienation becomes official upon every
one of the individuals from the family. The Dharmashastra recognizes this energy of the karta
to alienate the property yet under some particular circumstances as it were. They have been
expressed beneath:

Apatkale (Necessity in legal terms)

Kutumbarthe (Estate's advantage)

Dharmamarthe (Obligations of religious nature)14.

Necessity in legal terms

The term legal necessity does not hold any exact definition due to the 'n' no. of cases that are
seen and it being to a great degree hard to clarify it in correct terms. All things considered,

12
Dr. Diwan Paras, Modern Hindu Law, 16th Edn., Allahabad law agency 296-297.
13
Ibid.
14
Akash Mishra, “karta and his powers: an overview”, vol. 2, 3-4 (February 2015).
under understanding it can be expressed that the legal necessity of a family is with respect to
the necessities of a family and the alienation being in prerequisite of that need15.

1 - Estate's benefit.

This is likewise a wide paradigm for the alienation to happen. In it, the advantages which the
estate increases through any such determined alienation by the Karta is to be considered as
valid. Such valuable contracts of property alienation are encouraged and the karta holds the
right to go ahead under his judicious caution.

Comprehensively, advantage of estate implies anything, which is improved the situation the
advantage of the joint family property. There are two perspectives as to it. One view is that
lone construction, which is of guarded character, can be an advantage of estate. This view is
by all accounts no longer legitimate. The other view is that anything done which is of positive
advantage, will add up to profit of estate. The test is that anything which a reasonable
individual can do in regard of his own property. It was re-iterated through different case laws
that if the property claimed by the particular joint family is sold by the karta because of a
legitimate legal necessity and furthermore that the cost in kind was additionally sensible,
simply the way that a segment of the cost was not considered to have been not connected
with the end goal of necessity, can't render the entire system invalid16.

Considering a constraint in the issue, through this paper, it has been investigated that despite
the fact that the Karta holds preeminent administrative and alienation controls in the family
yet in the event that he gets into a contract where it is evident that the family can't complete
its commitments in financial terms, the risk can't be moved to tribal property
sale.Nevertheless, if there is a procurement made by the Karta for the joint family even
through the passing of a bit of a genealogical property, it is authoritative upon the minor
individuals from the family as well and they can't arraign this contract for which the
advantage has been delighted in, after achieving dominant part17.

Additionally, it is a cardinal rule that the activities of the karta must be legitimized with the
condition of necessity or advantage to the family for these members to be bound by the

15
Dr. Diwan Paras, Modern Hindu Law, 16th Edn., Allahabad law agency 298-299.
16
Darret J. Duncan M., “Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law”, vol. 2, Universal book and traders 119.
17
Ibid.
activities of the Karta. Such alienation can't be thought to be with the end goal of a legal
necessity "if the legal solution for recovery of the debt has progressed toward becoming time-
barred." He can alienate the property with his own discretion because of some necessity or
through the ordinary procedure of having a totality in family consent towards such
alienation18.

In this manner, it can be securely finished up through the exploration that Karta can just have
one determined confinement which is that: "A karta must act with prudence; prudence infers
alert and additionally foreknowledge and rejects hurried, reckless and arbitrary direct and
such alienation on part of the karta without the family reason or necessity statement, is void"
For this inquiry of prudence, the consideration's adequacy is an essential condition for such
judgment. As dissected however precedents, it can't be expressed that at whatever point a
karta requires money related aggregates keeping in mind the end goal to pay the pre-emption
necessities and at the costs of new property, it is dependably with no prerequisite in lawful
contraption and in this way, outside the ambit of the father in the family. Likewise, it can't be
expressed that the karta should obtain sums for such crisp procurement by pre-emption.
These issues must be managed by the extraordinary existing conditions each time. Likewise,
amid times when the cash obtained by the Karta is for his individual purposes, he isn't
permitted to mortgage or utilize the family property in any way to satisfy his own liabilities19.

Power to Contract Debts

The karta has the power to contract debts for the family as per their requirements and these
debts are binding upon every one of the individuals. The individuals can't escape liability
from these debts tons of partition from the joint estate. In any case, it has been built up that
the karta can't be permitted to bring loans by surrendering in as security, the estate of a minor
family part to begin some exchange of ancestral nature20.

Liability of different individuals

Amid the circumstance wherein the karta contracted an obligation on the family property, a
part isn't at risk in an individual way but instead, just to the furthest reaches of its advantage.
However, in a few conditions wherein the contract is really indicating to parties or when they
can be dealt with as gatherings because of their lead or in the event that they have consented

18
Supra, 15.
19
Akash Mishra, “karta and his powers: an overview”, vol. 2, 4-6 (February 2015).
20
Ibid.
to the course of action, their constrained does not stay restricted. So the considering of the
individuals to be genuine gatherings is fundamental to building up the liability proportion21.

Weight of Proof Requirement

Any obligation that has been contracted by a karta for the benefit of the family isn't innately
thought to be one where the enthusiasm of the family is included. As expressed in Mulla,
Principles of Hindu Law:

"At the point when the loan specialist knows about every one of the conditions of the family
to which the cash is loaned and he knows whether the obtaining emerged or not, the main
manner by which the family could be made subject in such a case would be by evidence that
the need existed"22.

The advance supplier is mandatorily required to investigate the need of the credit for the joint
family as the reason for the advance should be characteristically assumed. Alert amid the
request is sufficient to legitimize the advance however in the event that it is an issue when the
joint family has been taking loans since a no. of years, the advance supplier does not need to
demonstrate the need for each penny included23.

Power of the Karta to Gift Property

A karta may have a prevalent managerial authority yet he can't gift away family property
unless there is a legal impulse included or for religious purposes and so forth.

Movable Property as gifts

The father or the Karta has the authority to gift ancestral joint family property to children,
girls and so on as an issue of affection wherein the gift is in facilitation of "indispensible
demonstrations of obligation, and family, help from distress et cetera". Such gifts do have
restriction like a gift can't involve the entire property to be given to one specific part as it
can't be then maintained as "gift of affection24".

21
Darret J. Duncan M., “Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law”, vol. 2, Universal book and traders 121.
22
Roopa Gargava, “position of karta and the effect of amendment of section 6 of the HSA.
23
Ibid.
24
Supra, 21.
Immoveable Property as gifts

The karta does gangs the ability to gift an individual, inferable from couple of limitations, for
pious purposes. It was set down in Guramma v. Mallapa that a father can gift his girl a bit of
an immoveable property on the off chance that it complies with the reasonability criteria,
taking a gander at the properties which are claimed by the family. However, it isn't acceptable
for a husband to gift any such property to his spouse under the condition of "Pious
Purposes"25.

Gift to Strangers

The Karta just holds the privilege to gift properties to family individuals under a few
conditions and outsiders can't be a beneficiary of such a gift by no means. Such a gift, if
made, might be esteemed to be void ab initio26.

Karta’s Liabilities

Karta’s liabilities are numerous and multifarious:

Maintenance

In a joint Hindu family, the privilege of maintenance of all the coparceners out of the joint
family supports is an innate right and a basic nature of the coparcenery. As Mayne puts it:
Those who might be qualified for share the greater part of property are qualified for have all
their essential costs paid out of its income. Each coparcener, from the leader of the family to
the lesser most individuals, is qualified for maintenance. A Karta is capable to keep up all
individuals from the family, coparceners and others. In the event that he despicably prohibits
any part from maintenance or does not appropriately look after them, he can be sued for
maintenance and additionally for back payments of maintenance27.

25
Kusum, Family Law Lectures, (2nd Edn. Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2007)
26
Ibid.
27
Darret J. Duncan M., “Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law”, vol. 2, Universal book and traders 122.
Marriage

He is additionally in charge of the marriage of every unmarried part. This obligation is

especially underlined in regard of girls. Marriage of a girl is considered as a sacrosanct
obligation under Hindu law. Marriage costs are settled out of joint family funds28.

Chandra Kishore v. Nanak Chand AIR 1975 Del 175 29

For this situation it was considered that Karta is in charge of dealing with the costs of the
marriage of the little girl from the joint family estate. Furthermore, in the event that marriage
costs are met from outside they are to be repaid from the joint family funds.

Accounts at the time of Partition

Partition implies conveying the joint status to an end. On partition, the family stops to be a
joint family. Under the Mitakshara law, partition implies two things: -

(a) Severance of status/interest, and

(b) Actual division of property as per the shares so determined, known as partition by metes
and bounds.

The previous involves singular choice, the want to disjoin himself and appreciate the
unspecified and undefined share independently from others while the last is a resultant
subsequent of his presentation of expectation to separate yet which a reciprocal activity is
basically. Taking of records implies an enquiry into the joint family assets. It implies setting
up a stock of the considerable number of things of the joint family property.

The Mitakshara Karta isn't subject to accounts and no coparcener can even at the season of
partition, demand an explanation from upon the karta his past dealings with the joint family
property unless charges of fraud, misappropriation/conversion are made against him.

28
Ibid.
29
AIR 1975 Del 175
Ghuia Devi v. Shyamlal Mandal AIR 1974 Pat 6830

Facts: - Gokul Mandal was the common ancestor of the family, he had 2 sons: - Gobardhan
and Ghoghan. After Gokul’s death Gobardhan was the karta of the family. Shyamlal and
Kisan are the sons of Gobardhan. Shyamlal, defendant no.1 is the husband of the plaintiff. In
1951, partition took place between two branches: Shyamlal and Ghoghan. After partition,
Shyamlal began to act as karta of the family consisting of the members of Gobardhan’s
branch. Appellant is a pardanashin lady. Shyamlal took advantage of her position and
misappropriation of property and its income and as a result of it a suit was filed. Plea of
appellant was that their client was entitled to a decree for accounts. Their plea was rejected
because they could adduce no evidence.

Judgment: - In the suits for partition of a Joint Hindu Family property the manager/karta can
only be made liable for revaluation of account if there is a proof of misappropriation /fraud
and improper conversion of joint family assets and property. It was said that in the absence of
such a proof a coparcener seeking partition is not entitled to require the manager to account
for his past dealings with the joint family property.

However, when a coparcener suing for partition is entirely excluded from the enjoyment of
property he can ask for accounts.

After the severance of status has taken place, the karta is bound to render accounts of all
expenditure and income in the same manner as a trustee or agent is bound to render accounts.
This means that from the date of severance of status, the karta is bound to account for all
mesne profits.

30
AIR 1974 Pat 68.