The Hindu widow's estate under section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, is not an interest in property which ceases on the death of the widow attracting duty under section 7(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

K. VEERASWAMY J.

VEERASWAMI and RAMAPRASADA RAO JJ. (14-8-1969) K. R. Ramamani and S. V. Subramaniam, for Subbaraya Aiyar, Sethuratnan and Padmanabhan, for the appellant

V. Balasubrahmanyan J. Jayaraman for the respondent

VEERASWAMI J.--This reference involves a point of great importance and raises the scope of section 7(1) of the Estate Duty Act. Mammad Koyi v. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty has taken a particular view on that matter, which was actually a case of a Mohammedan tarwad. AttorneyGeneral of Ceylon v. Arunachalam Chettiar, though available at the time, does not appear to have been cited in that case. That was a judgment of the Privy Council. Since then, Gartside v. Inland Revenue Commissioners has come on a similar point which has been decided by the House of Lords. We consider that, in the circumstances, the reference should be disposed of by a fuller Bench of three judges. The papers will be placed before the learned Chief Justice for the purpose

[The case was heard by a Full Bench composed Of VEERASWAMI C.J

NATESAN and SOMASUNDARAM JJ.]

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the court was delivered by

VEERASWAMI C.J.

--This is a reference under section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. Sri Alladi Krishnaswami Iyer, who died before the Estate Duty Act came into force, had, during his lifetime, settled certain properties absolutely on his wife, Srimathi Alladi Venkalakshmamma, and had also declared certain other properties as joint family properties. The lady having died on January 5, 1956, the principal value of her estate passing on her death was determined by the revenue at Rs. 7, 25, 527. This sum included Rs. 2, 02, 271 as the value of her 1/4th share in the properties belonging to the Hindu family consisting of herself, and her three sons. The Central Board of Revenue, agreeing with the Estate Duty Officer upheld the inclusion as warranted by section 7(1) and dismissed the appeal from the assessment order. The Board held the view that the Hindu widow's estate created by section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, was an interest in property which ceased on the death of the widow attracting duty, and that Attorney-General of Ceylon v. Arunachalam Chettiar had no application to such a caseThe original reference to this court was of the following three questions

"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, one-fourth share of the deceased in the joint family properties, to which she was entitled under section 3 of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, was correctly included in her estate as property deemed to pass on her death under section 7 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ?

2. Whether the Estate Duty Act, 1953, in so far as it seeks to levy duty on agricultural lands, is ultra vires of the legislative powers of the Union Legislature?

3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the accrued interest on fixed deposits and Government securities up to the date of death of the deceased was correctly included in her estate under section 34(2) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ?" *

Of these, only the first is now pressed and not the others, on behalf of the accountable persons. The tax Bench, to which one of us was a party, thought when the reference in the first instance came before it, that having regard to the importance of the question, it should be disposed of by a fuller Bench. We have carefully examined the first question, and are clearly of opinion that it should be answered in favour of the accountable persons

By section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, a Hindu widow became entitled to have the same interest as her husband had at his death in the joint family property, but subject to the limitation placed by sub-section (3), that the interest so devolving on her should be but a limited interest known as a Hindu women's estate, provided, however, that she should have the same right of claiming partition as a male owner As Mulla on Hind