1. Whether a usufructuary mortgage and a specific sum were validly dedicated to a charitable endowment during the manager's lifetime or attempted via will. (Para 7 , 8 )
Back
Next 
1927 Supreme(SC) 16
Privy Council
Sir Lancelot Sanderson, Ameer Ali, Darling, Carson, Justice Phillimore, JJ.
Tadi Bulli Gangi Reddi -Appellant
Versus
Tadi Bulli Tammi Reddi and another -Resopndent
Privy Council Appeal No. 174 of 1924
Decided On : 22-02-1927
Important Points
Under Hindu law, a manager's dedication of ancestral property for religious charity is valid if done inter vivos with family assent or if the amount is small. Such dedication cannot be effected by will, and mere use of property income for charity does not constitute a formal dedication.
Subject
Civil Law - Hindu Law
Headnote
(A) Hindu Law - Charitable Endowments - Family Property - A dedication of a portion of family property for the purpose of a religious charity may be validly made without any instrument in writing, even if it be an appropriation of landed property, provided the act of the manager of the family is assented to, however informally, by the other members of the family. Such an appropriation may even be made by the manager without consent if the property allotted is small as compared with the total means of the family.
(B) Nature of Alienation - For a dedication of family property to be valid, the appropriation or alienation must be made by the manager by an act inter vivos; it must not be an alienation de futuro by will.
Facts of the case:
A dispute arose regarding the partition of ancestral family property. The deceased had executed wills claiming the property was self-acquired and attempting to endow a charitable house with a specific sum of money and the net profits of a usufructuary mortgage. While the courts accepted the dedication of the monetary sum, the validity of the dedication of the usufructuary mortgage was contested. The first defendant argued that there had been a dedication to charity during the lifetime of the deceased and that other interested family members had acquiesced. The lower courts differed on whether the mortgage had been dedicated inter vivos or merely used as a source of funds to meet expenses.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the accounts and evidence did not support a full appropriation of the net profits of the usufructuary mortgage to the charity. The evidence indicated that the property was treated as a purse from which expenses were met at the manager's pleasure, rather than the property itself being dedicated. There was no evidence of an irrevocable inter vivos donation of the specific mortgage property.
Issues: Whether the appropriation of the net profits of a usufructuary mortgage to a charitable endowment, as directed in a will but claimed to have occurred inter vivos, constituted a valid dedication of ancestral family property under Hindu law.
Ratio Decidendi: A valid dedication of ancestral property for charity must be an act inter vivos. The mere fact that expenses for a charity are met out of a particular property does not establish that the property itself was dedicated to the upkeep of the charity, especially when the accounts show that the full receipts were not applied to the charity and the manager retained the surplus.
Result: Appeal allowed.
(B) Nature of Alienation - For a dedication of family property to be valid, the appropriation or alienation must be made by the manager by an act inter vivos; it must not be an alienation de futuro by will.
Facts of the case:
A dispute arose regarding the partition of ancestral family property. The deceased had executed wills claiming the property was self-acquired and attempting to endow a charitable house with a specific sum of money and the net profits of a usufructuary mortgage. While the courts accepted the dedication of the monetary sum, the validity of the dedication of the usufructuary mortgage was contested. The first defendant argued that there had been a dedication to charity during the lifetime of the deceased and that other interested family members had acquiesced. The lower courts differed on whether the mortgage had been dedicated inter vivos or merely used as a source of funds to meet expenses.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the accounts and evidence did not support a full appropriation of the net profits of the usufructuary mortgage to the charity. The evidence indicated that the property was treated as a purse from which expenses were met at the manager's pleasure, rather than the property itself being dedicated. There was no evidence of an irrevocable inter vivos donation of the specific mortgage property.
Issues: Whether the appropriation of the net profits of a usufructuary mortgage to a charitable endowment, as directed in a will but claimed to have occurred inter vivos, constituted a valid dedication of ancestral family property under Hindu law.
Ratio Decidendi: A valid dedication of ancestral property for charity must be an act inter vivos. The mere fact that expenses for a charity are met out of a particular property does not establish that the property itself was dedicated to the upkeep of the charity, especially when the accounts show that the full receipts were not applied to the charity and the manager retained the surplus.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
family law
-
hindu law
-
joint family property
- partition
- charitable endowments
-
joint family property
-
hindu law
-
practice and procedure
-
evidence
- documentary evidence
- oral evidence
-
evidence
Advocates Appeared:
K.V.L. Narasimham, L. DeGruyther, K.V.L. Narasimham, L. DeGruyther
K.V.L. Narasimham, L. DeGruyther, K.V.L. Narasimham, L. DeGruyther
Table of Contents
Lord Phillimore. -
This case turns on a question of fact. A member of the family of Reddi, whom it is convenient to call Gangi Reddi, was a merchant carrying on business at Cocanada. He died in April 1917. He had two sons, one of whom predeceased him, leaving a son the present plaintiff. The younger son and his son are the present defendants. There were also several daughters. Gangi Reddi made three wills asserting that his property was self-acquired property, and being such that he could dispose of by will. It has, however, been decided that his property is to be regarded as ancestral family property, and not such as he could dispose of by will.
The younger son had assisted his father in his later years and was, according to the will to be manager of the family property, and in fast he undertook to manage it and did so till this suit was brought on the 18th December 1918. By it the plaintiff's claim to a half-share of the entire family property was asserted and a partition was demanded.
The plaint contained various allegations of malversation by the first defendant.
When the case came on for trial a number of questions arose which were disposed of by the Subordinate Judge. Most of his directions were confirmed by the High Court on appeal. In the cases in which the judgment of the Subordinate Judge was so varied the decision of the High Court has been generally accepted. The only point remaining is that which is the subject of the present appeal.
The earlier clauses of the will provide for certain distributions between the wife, and sons and daughters which are either not questioned or have been disposed of by the judgments already mentioned. The last clauses of the will run as follows:
7. I advanced a loan to Muchilika Appalaraju and others of Chengondapalli, Ernagudem taluk, took a usufructuary mortgage of Chengondapalli and its hamlets Patnam Madampatt, etc., forming a muttah belonging to the said Appalaraju and others and have been managing the same. The net profits realized from the said muttah annually, I have been giving away for the expanses of feeding, etc., in the choultry which I built in Gtollalamamidada and have been making credit and debit entries accordingly in the accounts also. So long as the said Chengoadapalli muttah is in our possession according to the term, the net profits annually realized therefrom shall be paid for the expenses of the said choultry even after my death, and Bulli Thammi Reddi shall look after the whole management needed for it. Besides this, the interest that may annually be realized on a sum of Rs. 10,000, (ten thousand rupees,) out of my own funds shall either be spent to meet the expenses of the charity choultry at Gollalamamidada once a year or shall be kept in deposit for the said purpose.
8. The will already executed by me on 13th May 1906, and registered as No. 12 on pp. III to 114 of Vol. 4, Book III, in the office of the Sub-Registrar of Bikkavole is hereby cancelled and this will has been executed to take effect from the time of my death. This will is executed with my consent.
It has been stated that Gangi Reddi claimed that his property was all self-acquired. He asserted this claim in the first paragraph of the will in question; but as it has been decided that this claim was not well founded he could not dispose of his property or found a charitable endowment by will. In the present suit the plaintiff disputed the validity of this endowment, and the first defendant supported it.
Originally the defence rested upon the proposition that the property was self-acquired; but during the progress of the case the first defendant was allowed to raise further defences, namely, that there had been a dedication to charity during the lifetime of Gangi Reddi, and that the plaintiff's father and other persons interested had acquiesced in the dedication. As regards the sum of Rs. 10,000 the Subordinate Judge upheld this dedication while in respect of the usufructuary mortgage he held that there was n
