KARTA OF JOINT FAMILY

Advertisements

Spread the love

Post Views: 668

This article is written by Mrigha Mahajan of 3^rd Semester of The Law School, University of Jammu, an intern under Legal Vidhiya

ABSTRACT

In Hindu joint households, the Karta plays a very important function. Entrusted with the duties of managing daily operations, safeguarding family assets, and guaranteeing the welfare of all family members, the Karta is the manager of the family and its holdings. The Karta’s status is determined by a number of duties and liabilities in addition to rights and powers. It is possible to better understand the dynamics of a joint family and its hierarchical structure by comprehending the function and responsibilities of a Karta.

KEYWORDS: karta, joint family, manager, coparcener, guardian, kartaship.

INTRODUCTION

In Hindu society, a joint family is the norm—at least it was until the last few decades. A Hindu joint family is a group of relatives who share a common ancestor and are connected by marriage and kinship. It encompasses spouses, offspring, and future offspring. Hindu families typically participate together in prayer, cooking, and business. Hindu joint families include even daughter-in-law’s and widowed daughters who have reconnected with their parents. A combined family might consist of several generations. The Karta is the collective name for the head of the Hindu household. In a joint Hindu household, the eldest male member is regarded as the Karta, if he is well enough to function as such and does not have any mental or physical disabilities.

MEANING

It is assumed that the Karta is typically the oldest and most senior male member of the family and that no outsider or stranger can become a Karta. The oldest male member who is still living, regardless of how old, frail, or ill he may be, serves as Karta. Kartaship shall be passed to the following senior-most male member upon his death. A junior can also become a Karta if all coparcener agrees, however they cannot act as Karta in the presence of the senior most male member. Karta obtained his position with the approval of all co-signatories.

WHO CAN BE A KARTA?

The senior-most male member has the right and the ability to become a Karta. Karta is always a family member; no stranger or outsider can become a Karta. If the family’s senior male member is still living, he will continue to serve as Karta; if he passes away, the second senior male member will assume control of Karta. By unanimous assent or agreement of all the coparceners, Karta assumes his role. A junior might also become a family Karta with the consent of the coparceners. A junior male member can become a Karta of the family by reaching an agreement with the coparceners. Dharmastra states that in a family where a male member is absent, a female can take on the role of a Karta. Females can also serve as a Karta at that time if there are male members present but they are minors.

CHARACTERISTICS OF A KARTA

The following are the characteristics of a karta in a joint family :

The role of Karta is singular (sui generis). He holds a unique status inside the family, and no one can be compared to him.
Even if he acts on behalf of other members, he cannot be regarded as a partner or agent because he has unrestricted power.
He has extensive power and oversees all family issues.
He owes no one anything. The only exception to this rule is that he is responsible in cases of fraud, misappropriation, or conversion.
He is not required to save, invest, or use less money. Unless he is not accountable for the aforementioned charges, he is free to use the resources as he pleases.
He is not required to distribute the money received from the joint property to the family members in an equal amount. He is not required to be impartial and is free to discriminate against others. All he needs to do is provide money to everyone so they can afford basic essentials like food, clothing, shelter, and education.

FEMALES AS KARTA

Since the ancient society was predominately male, the idea of Karta has always been perceived as male-dominated. As a result, only men were able to become Kartas in HUF families, and this pattern persisted even after independence. The courts held in cases like Commissioner of Income Tax V. Govindram Sugar Mills [1] and Sahdeo Singh V. Ramchabila Singh [2] that women were not allowed to be Kartas because they were not coparceners. This was the role that was held prior to 2005. However, with the 2005 amendment to Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, women are now permitted to be coparceners, which also entitles them to become Kartas of the family, as long as they are the oldest members.

MOTHER AS KARTA

It is evident that a mother can serve as a karta, but only in situations where the child’s mother is the natural guardian and the succeeding karta is minor. A mother or any other female cannot, in general, become the karta of the Hindu Undivided Family. In the case of Sushila Devi Rampura v. Income tax Officer[3], it was decided that a woman could represent a Hindu Undivided Family if the subsequent karta was a minor and their mother served as their natural guardian. As a result, it is evident that the legislation is fairly strict in nature. Even though a woman cannot hold the position of karta, other laws pertaining to coparcenary must be followed to inherit property, and these laws have changed over time.

MINORS AS KARTA

In the event that an adult guardian represents and guides the minor in making decisions, section 21 of the Guardians and Wards Act 1897 allows the lone remaining minor in a Hindu Undivided family to become the Karta. However, this option is only viable in the event that no other family members who are capable of serving as Karta are still living.

MULTIPLE KARTAS

A HUF is not allowed to have more than one Karta, but provisions may be made to guarantee that there are several managing members who are coparceners and who have been collectively conferred with that right. This means that the right to make decisions necessary to safeguard the interests of the joint family and manage the property is granted after careful consideration among all coparceners; in the end, however, they are co-managers rather than joint Karta, as established in Nemi Chand V. Hira Chand[4].

LEGAL POSITION

To the members of the joint family, the karta essentially serves as a manager and protector figure. Together with the other family members, he may form a partnership in which he puts up funds and others put up labor and expertise. However, he does not establish a principal-agent relationship with the family members, despite Chandrakant v. C.T.R[5] holding that his status is “sui generis.’’ Despite having extensive managerial authority, the karta is not a trustee because of his sovereignty and fiduciary connection. This implies that until there are accusations of misappropriation, no one may question him about the money he spent. In the event that someone fabricates allegations of misappropriation on Karta, it is their responsibility to provide proof. The next step is for him to demonstrate that the act of Karta was dishonest. In order to protect family members’ interests, the karta may also launch lawsuits . In addition, even if he is not identified, he may defend the family in any court case. He may even agree to a compromise if it is done sincerely and for the interest of the family, including the children. As a result, it is clear that the karta has several abilities and is more than simply a manager.

POWERS OF KARTA

Power of Representation

In all family-related legal, religious, and social problems, the karta has the authority to represent. Generally speaking, the karta represents all family actions, whether they are performed for contractual obligations, commercial endeavors, or any other reason and lacks a corporate identity. The karta may represent himself in place of other family members in any litigation brought against the entire family or in a commercial dispute. Every member of the family, including the younger ones, must do the karta. A Karta is expected to represent the HUF in all legal, social, religious, and revenue-related matters, as well as in any dispute involving the HUF’s real estate. All members, coparceners, and children are likewise bound by a suit against Karta, as demonstrated by the Rajayya V. Singa Reddy[6] case. When a Karta loses a case because he voluntarily chose not to defend it or does not fight it honestly, the decree cannot be overturned for the reasons stated by other HUF members.

2. Power of Management

The Hindu Undivided Family is governed and managed by the karta, who is the head of the family. A karta has total managerial power. Due to the intrinsic capabilities of karta, no one may intervene, even if he exhibits partiality or bias against a family member. His actions are unquestionable unless and unless they are shown to be unlawful or unethical. Gaining the family members’ trust and confidence is crucial for maintaining all activities in the right order.

3. Power over income and expenditure

As the members reside in a joint family and the karta is in charge of overseeing everything, any member who makes money outside of the family business must give it to the karta. Individual family members are not entitled to request their portion of the income until the family is living together as a unit. As a result, karta’s power makes him accountable for all member finances, receipts, and outlays. This gives him the ability to monitor and oversee accounts automatically.

4. Power to enter into contract

The karta expressly has the authority to sign the agreement on behalf of the family members, and they will all be held equally responsible for it. A family contract, however, is expressly enforceable against the other members if the karta enters into one.

5. Power to enter into compromise

Karta is open to any compromise about the matters pertaining to the joint family. The family debts and other connected transactions may be the subject of the compromise. Such a deal can be contested during division if it is not dishonest. A karta can even jeopardize an ongoing legal action in which the family members are required to appear. Order 32, Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code, however, gives a minor the opportunity to file a lawsuit in court.

6. Power to enter into contract debts

Just as every action has an effect on other family members, so does every debt that Karta incurs have an effect on every member of the family. Even after the act of partition, they are still obligated to repay the loan. As demonstrated in Ananda Charan V. Jhatee Charan[7], the Karta can accept obligations incurred by the HUF and pay interest on the It should be mentioned that Karta is unable to use a minor’s estate as collateral for a loan—not even to launch an ancestor-related company. Only when the following requirements are met do the debts become familial obligations:

i. Debt is accrued for commercial reasons.

ii. Debt is taken on for family reasons including benefiting the estate, being legally required, and other reasons.

7. Power to refer to arbitration

To protect the interests of the family, including minors who are obligated by the judgment made over it, the Karta is entitled to petition for arbitration. Karta has the ability to arbitrate, or resolve conflicts amongst family members; this was demonstrated in the Jagannath v. Munnu Lal[8]. The case of Bhola Prasad V. Ram Kumar[9] established that he cannot enter into a compromise for personal advantage. Coparceners, minors, and other family members cannot criticize a compromise if it is for the benefit of the family. This was stated in Nawal Kishore V. Sardar Singh[10].

8. Power of alienation

The karta can alienate the property, but only if it is done by:

i. Approval from each co-parcener

ii. For legal purposes

iii. For reasons of convenience

The approval of other coparceners is not required if the property is alienated for the benefit of the estate. For the interest of its members, the karta may even mortgage the property . Even debts obtained for one’s own benefit may be repaid using the proceeds from the sale of the mortgage. No third party may use an injunction to restrict the karta during such a transaction. Sukhdev vs Ram Prasad The karta may indicate that he has not engaged in dishonest or immoral behavior. It is not possible to stop a karta from alienating common property, nevertheless.

DUTIES AND LIABILITIES

At the time of division, provide account data. A Karta is not required to retain track of money received or spent, but if other coparceners demand it, they have the power to compel the Karta to provide such information. Girijanandini Devi V. Brijendra Narain[11]established this. It was decided in Gopal V. Trimbak[12] that only current accounts might be given on the day when a family member made a demand. However, the same can be done as stated in Suryanarayana V. Sugamanathi [13]. where allegations or claims of fraud, misappropriation, or conversion of joint family into personal purchases are involved, or when the nature of company dictates this.

Duty to Render Accounts:

Karta’s primary responsibility is to account to the other coparceners for the income and expenses derived from joint family property. However, he is not required to give an explanation for his previous actions with the family’s assets unless there is unequivocal evidence of his theft or illegal use of the assets. Only at the moment of partition, and then only for the family property as it was at that point, is he accountable. However, this does not imply that the parties must accept the Karta’s description of the property’s contents.

2. Responsibility to Realize obligation Owed to Family:

It is the Karta’s significant responsibility to endeavor sincerely to realize any obligation owed to family. However, he is unable to forgive any debt, even though he has complete authority to resolve disputes with creditors and to fairly reduce principal or interest in the family’s best interests.

3. Duty to Spend Reasonably:

The Karta has an obligation to use the shared family finances only for family-related expenses. It is not his responsibility to save money by needlessly cutting corners. He needs to spend sensibly. The solution would be to demand division if he spends excessively and other family members do not approve.

4. Duty Not to Begin New Business without the approval of Other Coparceners:

The Karta is not allowed to place the risk of a new business on the shoulders of either the adult or minor members of a joint family. Instead, he must first acquire the approval of other coparceners before beginning any new venture. Karta of the family utilizes joint family property for his independent company. He began his company at the Joint-Hindu property’s premises by borrowing money from the market. In addition to the Karta, junior Joint family members also used this property. The Supreme Court noted in this case that Karta’s business operations cannot be considered a joint family enterprise and that any properties purchased with proceeds from the business must be regarded as Karta’s personal property.

5. Duty not to alienate coparcenary property unless doing so is required by law and will benefit the estate:

The Karta has a responsibility to get adult coparceners’ permission before alienating joint family property. However, he does not require the approval of other coparceners if he alienates the property for the benefit of the estate or out of legal necessity. The key issue to be answered is whether the transaction is fair and proper—that is, if it is something a responsible owner would do given the information at hand—regardless of whether it is being justified on the basis of legal need or benefit to the estate.

CONCLUSION

In the Hindu joint family, the idea of karta plays a highly practical role in addition to being a position of authority. Whether it comes to property or legal matters, the karta represents the whole joint family, saving the hassle of having several claims of actions. The karta rules have given the members of the joint family sufficient remedies to safeguard their interests in the event that the karta engages in any tyrannical behavior. Centralization is the key to successful administration. The role of Karta has been wonderfully ordered, egalitarian, and accountable by the codified Hindu family laws, converting it from an antiquated idea to a fully operational contemporary one. In addition to changing the requirements to become a Karta, this system has been altered to enable women to do so. Thus, it may be said that in the Hindu Undivided Family, the karta has the role of manager or guardian. He doesn’t serve as an agent or trustee. In addition to his managerial authority, he also has the authority to maintain property, handle finances, sign contracts, accept loans, and settle debts. But karta’s authority must not be exercised with malicious purpose. Considering that all of the coparceners have faith in him. The law offers family members various remedies in the event that the karta engages in any behavior that goes against their interests. The solutions are to abstain from the Karta’s unlawful and immoral behavior.

REFERENCES