When Karta of joint Hindu family can be called upon to give account for past transaction?

The brings us to Mr. Rajagopala Sastri's second argument.While admitting the legal position that in the absence of any evidence of fraud or misappropriation the Karta cannot be called upon to account for the past transactions, learned Counsel stresses the responsibility of the Karta to establish what are the assets available for partition. In support of this, the learned Counsel drew our attention to the decision in Parmeshwar Dube v. Gobind Dube(1). That case laid down the rule that in the absence of fraud or other improper conduct the only account the Karta of a joint family is liable for is to the existing state of the property divisible; but that this did not mean that the parties were bound to accept the statement of the Karta as to what the property consisted of and an enquiry should be directed by the court in a manner usually adopted to discover what in fact the property consisted of at the date of the partition. 

Supreme Court of India

K. V. Narayanaswami Iyer vs K. V. Ramakrishna Iyer And Ors on 26 March, 1964

Equivalent citations: 1965 AIR 289, 1964 SCR (7) 490

BENCH:

GUPTA, K.C. DAS
SUBBARAO, K.
DAYAL, RAGHUBAR

Print Page