109 and the punjab haryana high companyrt judgment in c.e.d.v.
before discussing the companyrectness of the above companyclu sion it may be companyvenient to set out the background of facts in civil appeal number 1204/79.
1968 69 i.t.r.
from the judgment and order dated 3.2.1978 of the madras high companyrt in tax case petition number 271 of 1977.
sri natesan chetty had also borrowed a sum of rs.
in view of the pendency of civil appeal number 1204/79 we grant special leave in slp c number 335/79 also.
these borrowings were made between march 1970 and april 1971 and they were repaid in april 1971.
that appeal arises out of the estate duty assessment companyse quent on the death of one natesan chetty who died on 1.3.72.
this companyrt as did the madras high companyrt in ranganayaki ammal the andhra pradesh decision in cherukuru eswaramma c.ed.
it therefore follows that there was numberextinguishment of the right of the deceased and creation of a right in favour of anumberher in these of throw ing the self acquired properties into the common stock.
jai gopal mehra 1972 85 i.t.r.
46800 from the huf out of the rental income from the above mentioned properties for being invested in the business earned on by him.
on 18.6.1970 and 16.9.1970 he made declarations by which he impressed the above mentioned properties with the character of joint family properties and declared that they would thereafter belong to huf of which he was the karta.
hence the present civil appeal.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1204 nt of 1979.
he was also the owner in his individual capacity of five house properties in madras.
whether the act of a member of a joint family by which he impresses his individual property with the charac ter of joint family property or throws it into the hotch potch of the joint family or blends it with the joint family property is a disposition within the meaning of the estate duty act 1953 the act for short .
subsequently a partition was effected in the family in march 1971 in which two of the above mentioned properties came to the share of the deceased.
sampath for the respondents.
he was the karta of a hindu undivided family huf consisting of himself and his four sons.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ranganathan j. both these matters raise the same ques tion viz.
with civil appeal number 4371 nit of 1991.
on 16th numberember 1953 and instrument styled a release deed was executed between the two persons.
janaki ramchandran and a.t.m.
civil appeal number 1204/79 is an appeal from an order of the high companyrt declining to call upon the income tax appel late tribunal to refer the above question for the decision of the high companyrt in view of certain earlier decisions of the companyrt.
a. subhashini for the appellant.
