KARTA:(POSITIONS,

LIABILITIES AND Dilshad Ahmed

Roll no. 22.
POWERS) B.A.LLB.(Hons.)
5th Semester
(Regular Batch).
In this research paper I will deal with Family
Law and specifically Karta’s position, liabilities
and powers with help of the Constitution of
India and some statutes and landmark case
judgment by courts of India.
Introduction
In Hindu law, the joint family has always been considered as a patriarchal
organization in which the senior most male ascendant is revered as the elder of the
family or Karta or manager.
A Karta is revered as an elder member of the family. In Hindu law, here are some
of the functions that are carried out by a Karta:
1. Takes decisions for the welfare of the family.

2. Acts on behalf of the family regarding all important matters.

3. Occupies a fiduciary position as the family members trust him to manage

their property related matters.

4. He has the power to incur debts or opt for a loan on behalf of the family.
“All the members in your family, including your wife, children, their wives and
their children. While the male members are called coparceners, the females are
referred to as members. The senior-most male member is called the karta
(manager), and a typical Hindu Undivided Family Consists of a karta, his sons,
grandsons, and great-grandsons (all of whom are coparceners), and their wives and
unmarried daughters (all of whom are members)”.
The manager of the hindu joint family is called the karta. 1 It is a presumption of
Hindu law, that ordinarily the senior most male member is the Karta of the joint
family.2 The senior most male member is Karta by virtue of the fact that he is
senior most male member provided that he is otherwise fit to act as such that he is
not suffering from any physical or mental deficiency.3 He is not an agent or trustee

1
Suraj Bansi Koer v. Sheo Prasad (1880) 5 calcutta 148.
2
Shreeama v. Krishnavenanama, 1957 A.P. 434; Ram v. Khira, 1971 Patna 286; Abdulla v. Raunny, 1973 K.L.R,
350.
3
G.M. Diwekar, Hindu Law-A critical commentary 56. (Hindu Law House 2nd ed. 2002).

Page | 1
of the family but as the head of the family he is the custodian or guardian of the
property and affairs of the family and of the interest of the family. 4 He does not
owe his position to agreement or consent of other coparceners. So long as he is
alive, may be aged, infirm, or ailing, he will continue to be Karta. 5 Even a leper
may continue to be the Karta. However, in cases of insanity or any other
disqualifications, the next senior male member generally takes over the Kartaship.
Once this is done the former will cease to be a Karta. So long as the father is alive,
he is the Karta. After his death it passes to the senior most male member, who may
be the uncle, if coparcener consists of uncles and nephews, or who may be the
eldest brother, if coparcenery consists of brothers.
The karta of the joint hindu family is certainly the manager of the joint family
property but undoubtedly possesses powers which the ordinary manager does not
possess. The karta, therefore, cannot be just equated with the manager of the
property.6 The position of a karta which is acquired by birth and regulated by
seniority, subject to his capacity to act, is terminable either by resignation or
relinquishment and is not indefeasible.7

Who can be Karta??

1. More than one Karta :

There can be more than one karta8. Two persons may look after the affairs of the
family9; this authority is based not on any Hindu laws but on the members of the
family who confer this authority on them. The most important qualification

4
Ibid, p.57.
5
Man v. Gaini, (1918) 40 Allahabad 77.
6
Union of India v. Shri Ram Bohra, MANU/SC/0004/1965: AIR 1965SC 1531.
7
Ranganath Mishra and Vijender Kumar, (rev.), Mayne , “Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage”, 16th ed. ;2008,p.576.
8
Mudit v. Ranglal, (1902) 29 Cal. 797; Darshan v. Prabhu, (1946) All. 67.
9
Union of India v. Shriram MANU/SC/0004/1965: AIR 1965 SC 1531.

Page | 2
required to become a Karta is that the person should be a coparcener in the family.
With the consent of the others, a junior member of the family may become the
manager of the family property or there can be more than one managing
member10. There cannot be two kartas of a joint Hindu family but karta or
members of the joint Hindu family can by express or implied terms confer
authority on a junior member to look after the affairs of the joint Hindu family or
its business and to take all necessary steps for the smooth and beneficial
management of the business and to protect the interest of such joint family
business11.

2. Female member as Karta :

The Nagpur High Court held that the view that mother, though not a coparcener,
can be, in the absence of adult male members, karta of the joint family, and her
acts will be binding on others as that of a karta.The Supreme Court in Commr. Of
Income-tax v. Seth Govind Ram,12 after reviewing the authorities, took the view
that the mother or any other female could not be the karta of the joint family and
therefore cannot alienate joint family property13. This is in accordance with the
texts of Hindu law. According to Hindu sages, only a coparcener can be karta;
since females cannot be coparcener, they cannot be the karta of the joint family.
Much could be said in favour of the Nagpur view in the context in which mother
was held to be the karta, but the Supreme Court could not legislate 14.

In Gangoli v. H.K. Channappa, 15 the Karnataka High Court expressed the view

10
Ibid.
11
Nemi Chand v. Hira Chand, 2000 (1) HLR 250 (Raj).
12
1966 Kant. 222.
13
Kanji v. Parmanand, 1991 M.P. 208.
14
Derrett : Critique of Modern Hindu Law, 117-21
15
1983 Kant. 222.

Page | 3
that the mother as natural guardian of her minor sons can manage the joint family
property and appointment of a guardian by court will not be justified. This is
obviously the situation where the father is dead and there is no adult male
member.

After coming into force of Amendment Act of 2005, a woman since is now a
coparcenar, the bar of her becoming a karta should also be no longer there.

3. Minor as a karta :
As regards, junior male members, as long as a senior member is present they
cannot become Karta, unless all the coparceners agree to the junior member
occupying managerial position. This was re-affirmed by the Narendra Kumar v.
CIT.16 If it turns out that a minor is the only one left to be manager, he can as long
as a capable guardian represents him. Section 21 of the Guardians and Wards Act,
1890 recognises the competence of minors to occupy managerial position in an
undivided family. 17

4. Father as karta :
If the manager or the karta is the father, he has certain additional powers of
alienation under the Hindu law and in exercise of those powers, he can alienate
joint family property so as to bind the interests of his minor sons in such
property.18 Property belonging to a joint family is ordinarily managed by the
father or other senior member of the family. In case of a father as the karta, the
debts for which the property is alienated may not be for the benefits of the family

16
MANU/SC/0523/1976: AIR 1976 SC 1953.
17
Sarda Prasad v. Umeshwar Prasad (1963) Pat 274.
18
Subramaniam v. Krishnaswami AIR 1972 Mad 377.

Page | 4
provided they are antecedent debts not tainted by immorality or any illegality. 19

Position Of The Karta :

The position of karta is sui generis. It is the duty of the karta to see that all
reasonable wants of the members are satisfied. If the karta fails to fulfill his duty,
the members could enforce it by legal action. 20 An undivided Hindu family is
ordinarily joint not only in estate, but also in food or worship; therefore, not only
the concerns of the joint property, but whatever relates to their commensality and
their religious duties and observances, must be regulated by its members or the
business manager to whom they have expressly, or by implication, delegated the
task of regulation.21 The Karta represents his joint family on all matters, whether
they are religious, social or legal in character. He acts on behalf of the family and
his acts are absolutely binding on them. The joint family has no corporate
existence, 22 it acts on all issues through its Karta. In Radhakrishna v. Kuluram,16
the Supreme Court held that the Karta can enter into any transaction on behalf of
the family and it will be ordinarily binding on the members.23

Legal position of the Karta :

The karta can file suits or take other legal proceedings to safeguard the interest of
the family and its properties and business. He can represent the family effectively
in a proceeding even if he has not been named as such. Where a transaction
purports to have been entered into by two or more persons described as kartas or

19
Sarangpani v. K.V.Pradhan 1993 (1) Hindu L.R. 17 (Mad.).
20
Werner Menski, Hindu Law Beyond Tradition and Modernity 491 (Oxford University Press 1st ed. 2003).
21
Raghunanda v. Brozo Kishoro, (1876) 1 Mad 69.
22
Lalitha Kumari v. Rajah of Vezianagaram, MANU/TN/0008/1950: AIR 1950 Mad 19.
23
Radhakrishna v. Kuluram, MANU/SC/0393/1962: AIR 1967 SC 574.

Page | 5
managers of the joint family, they must all join as Plaintiffss in the suit. However,
it is not necessary that all members of the joint family should join in the suit.
There is no right in a minor or an adult member of the family to bring a suit to set
aside a decree passed against the manager on the ground that the manager acted
with gross negligence in the conduct of the suit. An adverse order passed against
the manager requiring him to deliver the possession of the property to another
person, binds the other members of the family, though they are not parties there.
He can refer any disputes to arbitration or can effect settlement or compromise of
such disputes. The reference may be in respect of disputes between the family and
an outsider, or disputes between the members of the family themselves, e.g. as to
shares on partition. A compromise entered into by the manager bona fide for the
benefit of the family, binds the other members of the family including minors.

Position regarding Property :

Immovable property - If the family has immovable property or properties he has
the power to manage the same by recovering rents, paying expenses by way of
taxes, maintenance and carrying out repairs. 24 The karta can bring a suit for
recovery of the joint family property on behalf of the joint family members.25
Movable property - The father has the power of making within reasonable limits
gifts of ancestral moveable property without the consent of his sons for the
purpose of performing “indispensable acts of duty, and for purposes prescribed by
texts of law, as gifts through affection, support of the family, relief from distress
and so forth.”26 A gift of affection may be made to a wife, a daughter and even to
a son.

24
Bhowani v. Jagannath, (1909) 13 Cal. W.N. 309.
25
Gangadhar Rao v. Ganga Rao, MANU/AP/0117/1968: AIR 1968 AP 291
26
Gangadhar Agarwal v. CIT, (1989) 162 ITR 320 (Bom).

Page | 6
Karta’s Liabilities :
Karta’s liabilities are numerous and multifarious. The karta of the joint family is
responsible to maintain all members of the family. Coparceners and others. If he
improperly excludes any member from maintenance or does not properly maintain
them, he can be sued for maintenance as well as for arrears of maintenance. He is
also responsible for the marrisge of all unmarried members. The responsibility has
been particularly emphasized in respect of daughters. If a partition suit is filed, he
has to prepare accounts, though this has different meaning under the Dayabhaga
and the Mitakshara schools. The Karta represents the family. He is its sole
representative vis-à-vis the government and all outsiders and in that capacity he
has to discharge many responsibilities and liabilities on behalf of the family and
he can be sued for all his dealings on behalf of the family with outsiders. 27

Powers of Karta :
When we enumerate the powers of karta. The real importance of his legal
position comes into clear relief. His powers are vast and limitations are few. The
ambit of his powers may be considered under two heads : (a) power of alienation
of joint family property, and (b) others powers, in the former, his powers are
limited. As a general rule, he has no power of alienation. He can alienate
properties in exceptional cases only. In the latter case, his powers are very large,
almost absolute, though in respect of incurring debts his powers are again
restricted.

Powers of management – As the head of the family, karta’s powers of

27
Dr. Paras Diwan “Modern Hindu Law” 24th ed. 2019. p.319.

Page | 7
management are almost absolute. He may manage the family affairs and family
property and business the way he likes, he may mismanage, no one can question
his management. The karta has no obligation to save or economise, no obligation
to invest funds, or to invest them properly. For instance, he may not lease out
family property or he may lease it out at a nominal rent. He may discriminate
between the members of the family ; to some he may give more to spend, to some
less; some may be given higher education, while others may be given only
primary education. To some he may allot a bigger portion of the house to live in,
to some he may allot smaller portion. But he cannot deny maintenance or use and
occupation of property to any coparcener. Then the ever-hanging sword of
partition is a great check on his absolute powers. The other, and probably more
effective check, the affection and the natural concern that he has for the members
of the family and the complete faith and confidence that members repose in him.

Right to income – It is the natural consequence of joint family system that the
whole of income of joint family property. Whosoever may collect them, a
coparcener, agent or a servant, must be handed over to the karta unless he has
specifically allotted income of a particular property to a member. It is a rule of a
Mitakshara joint family property or business. It is for the karta to allot funds to the
members and to after their needs and requirements. So long as the family remains
joint, no member can ask for any specified share in the income.

Right to representation – The karta of the joint family represents the family in all
matters, legal, social and religious. He acts on behalf of the family and his acts are
binding on the entire joint family. The joint family has no corporate existence, it
acts in all matters through its karta. The karta can enter into any transaction on

Page | 8
behalf of the family, and it will be ordinarily binding on the joint family. 28 Merely
because one of the member of the family also joins him in the representation, does
not alter the position of the karta or the binding character of the transaction so
entered into by the karta. He also represents the family in suits and other legal
proceedings.29 The joint family will be bound by a decree or order passed in the
legal proceedings. Even when the karta has lost a case on account of his gross
negligence, it is not open to other members to have the decree set aside on that
ground alone. 30

Power of acknowledgement – The karta has power to acknowledge on behalf of

the family any debt due to the family. He has also the power to pay interest on a
debt or to make part payment of the principal so that a fresh period of limitations
may start.31 But the karta has no power to acknowledge a time-barred debt.32

28
Radhakrishnadas v. Kuluram, 1967 S.C. 574.
29
Amrit v. Suresh, 1970 S.C.
30
Lingangowda v. Basangowda, (1927) 54 I.A. 122.
31
Section 21, Limitation Act.
32
Dassappa v. Vedarathamma, 1972 Mys. 288.

Page | 9
Conclusion
The concept of Karta in the Hindu joint family is not just a position of power but
also serves a very practical purpose. A Hindu joint family is a very complex entity
and it is imperative that in order that all the functions and duties are carried out
conveniently, there be a centralizing force, which is readily provided by the karta.
Whether it is regarding the legal issues or regarding property issues, the karta
represents the entire joint family and this saves the trouble of multiple claims of
action. Centralization is the key to good management and this is provided by the
karta.
Along with numerous powers, a lot of checks have also been imposed on the
karta to prevent any misuse of power. This ensures that the karta works for the
benefit of the joint Hindu family. Law has provided enough remedies to the
members of the joint family to protect their interest in case of any despotic
behaviour by the karta.

Page | 10
Reference
Books :

1. Dr. Paras Diwan “Modern Hindu Law” 24th ed. 2019.

2. Dr. R.K. Agarwal “Hindu Law”, Central Law Publication.

Websites :

1. https://www.lawctopus.com/academike.
2. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in.
3. http://www.legalservicesindia.com.
4. http://www.Manupatra.com
5. http://www.supremecourtcases.com

Page | 11