Alienation By Karta For The Benefit Of The Estate Binding On Other Members Of Joint Family: SC

• Recently, in the case of Beereddy Dasaratharmi vs. V. Manjunath (2021) SC the Hon’ble SC has held that an alienation of the joint hindu family property made for the benefit of the property, done by the Karta, would be binding on othermembers of the Joint Family.
• In this case, K. Vellusamy, acting in his capacity as a karta, agreed to sell off the suit property for Rs.29 lakhs and has received Rs.4 lakhs in advance from the appellant. Beereddy then instituted a suit for the specific performance of the agreement to sell against both Vellusamy and his son V. Manjunath. The suit was decreed by the trial court.
• V. Manjunath instituted an appeal in the HC and contended that since the joint property was under the ownership of three persons, namely K. Vellusamy, his wife and his son, V. Manjunath, his signatures were also necessary before alienating the property, which were not taken by his father.
• The HC held that the agreement to sell is unenforceable as the property was jointly owned by the three persons and hence could not be alienated without the signatures of the others.
• The Apex Court, in the present case held that “where a Karta has alienated a Joint Hindu Family property for value either for legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate, it would bind the interest of all the members of the undivided members of the family even when they are minors or widows”.
• Referring to the decision of this Court in Kehar Singh vs. Nachittar Kaur (2018) SCC, the court further held that alienation of property by karta, done because of legal necessity, is binding on all the members of the joint family. What constitutes legal necessity, the Court held, is a question of fact depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.

And now, a question for our aspirants-

Devolution of interest in coparcenary property has been dealt with under which section of the Hindu Succession Act?