SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(SC) 389

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.S. PATHAK, CJI., M.N. VENKATACHALIAH, J.
Dipti Narayan Srimani, Appellant
Versus
Controller of Estate Duty, West Bengal, Respondent.
Civil Appeals Nos. 946 and 1251 of 1975, D/- 9-5-1988.
AND
Controller of Estate Duty, West Bengal, Appellant
Versus
Dipti Narayan Srimani, Respondent.
Advocates appeared
Dr. Shankar Ghosh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. D. P. Mukharji and Mr. G. S. Chatterjee, Advocates with him, for Appellant in C.A. No. 946/75 and for Respondent in C. A. No. 1251 of 1975; Mr. C. M. Lodha, Sr. Advocate, Ms. A. Subhashini and Mr. K. C. Dua, Advocates with him, for Respondent and in C.A. No. 1251 of 1975, for Appellant.

Advocates:
A.Subhashini, C.M.Lodha, D.P.MUKHERJI, G.S.CHATTERJEE, K.C.DUA, SHANKAR GOPAL PAGIRE

Headnote:

Estate Duty Act of 1953 – Section 65 – Matter pertained to the determination of the principal value of the estate passing on the death, which occurred, of a certain, appellant in C.A. is the son of the deceased and is the accountable person – Said during his lifetime had executed three trust deeds, respectively. In the proceedings, the nature and effect of the dispositions made under the deeds of the trust, fell for consideration – Deed, transferred upon trust to himself as trustee 4 items of immovable property, viz., 130 and 133, upper circular Road, and 32/5 and 32/6 Beadon Street, Calcutta objects and purposes of the trust, broadly stated, were – Conduct of the daily worship and sevas of the Deity Sree Sridhar Jiu – Carrying out of certain charitable acts, deeds and things mentioned in schedule B of the deed – Making of provision for the maintenance of himself and the persons mentioned in the said deed –Held, Colloquial and somewhat liberal connotation of interest was adopted and followed in Attorney General v. Farrel, (1931) 1 KB 8 1, Greer, L. J. Said – Case the only interest which the settlor retained in the sum of money settled by him was the expectation, well founded or ill founded, that the trustees would exercise their discretion in his favour; but the trustees might quite lawfully have refused to give him anything, and have distributed the income among his wife and children – He had a mere expectation that the discretion which was vested in the trustees might be exercised in his favour, either partly or entirely, and that in my judgment is exactly the position that Major Alfred Stourton was in this case – He had no legal right to force the trustees to give him anything; at the same time he had in a colloquial sense an interest in the estate, because it was an estate out of which something might be allotted to him in the discretion of the trustees – Whether that is an interest within the meaning has, I think, been determined by Attorney- General v. Heywood, and the decision has stood since, a period of forty-three years – Order accordingly.

Judgment

VENKATACHALIAH, J. :- These appeals, by certificate, under S. 65 of the Estate Duty Act of 1953 (Act for short) - one by the accountable person and the other by the Deputy Controller of the Estate Duty - arise out of and are directed against the judgment dated, 11-10-74 of the High Court of Calcutta, answering, in a reference under S. 64(1) of the Act, the question of law referred for its opinion,

The matter pertained to the determination of the principal value of the estate passing on the death, which occurred on 24-3-1960, of a certain Satya Charan Srimani. Dipti Narayan Srimani, appellant in C.A. 946/1975 is the son of the deceased and is the accountable person.

2. The said Satya Charan Srimani during his lifetime had executed three trust deeds, dated, 8-12-1947, 21-9-1953 and 4-10-1959 respectively. In the proceedings, the nature and effect of the dispositions made under the deeds of the trust, dated 21-9-1953 and 4-10-1959 fell for consideration.

Under the deed, dated 21-9-1953, Satya Charan Srimani as settlor transferred upon trust to himself as trustee 4 items of immovable property, viz., 130 and 133, upper circular Road, and 32/5 and 32/6 Beadon Street, Calcutta. The objects and purposes of the trust, broadly stated, were :

(i) the conduct of the daily worship and sevas of the Deity Sree Sridhar Jiu,

(ii) the carrying out of certain charitable acts, deeds and things mentioned in schedule B of the deed;

(iii) the making of provision for the maintenance of himself and the persons mentioned in the said deed.

The trustee was required, after defraying taxes and other out goings, to accumulate 1/4th of the net-income to be set apart for purposes of effecting certain additions and alterations to the properties; to make over another 1/4th of the net-income to the shebait for the conduct of the daily and periodical pujas, worship and rituals of the said deity, another 1/4th for the charities mentioned in the deed and the remaining 1/4th for the personal benefit of the settlor during his lifetime and to his heirs thereafter. After the developmental works were complete, the proportions of the shares allotted to various objects were suitably modified in that 7/16th share was to be made over to the shebait; 4/16th share to be spent for charitable purposes and 5/16th for the benefit of the settlor and his heirs.

3. Under the deed dated 4-10-1959, the settlor transferred upon trust to himself and his son Dipti Narayan Srimani as Trustees, six other properties, one of them situate in Varanasi, for the conduct of daily-worship and periodical festivals, rituals and ceremonies of the deity, Shri Ishwar Gobinda Jiu; for certain charitable purposes and also for the benefit of himself and his heirs. The settlor provided for his residence, free of rent, in one room on the ground floor in the Varanasi property. A 1/4th of the net-income of the trust-properties, after defraying expenses and taxes, was to be paid to the shebait for the conduct of the worship, rituals and services of the deity Shri Ishwar Gobinda Jiu; another 1/4th to be spent on the charitable purposes mentioned in the deed and the balance of 1/2 for the development, additions and alterations of two of the trust-properties viz. Nos. 41 and 42 Macleod Street, Calcutta. After completion of the developments and alterations, the said 1/2 share was stipulated to go for the benefit of the settlor during his lifetime and thereafter to his heirs. Under both the dispensations, the settlor constituted himself the shebait.

4. In the proceedings of assessment to estate duty, the question arose whether the trust-deeds attracted - and fell within - S.12(1) of the Act. The accountable person contended that the four trust properties under deed dated 21-9-1953 could not be said to be "Settled Property" within the definition in S. 2(19) and that all events what must be held to pass would only be a 1/4th share, corresponding to the benefit reserved for the settlor and his heirs. Similarly, in resp




































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top