CHERADAPPA PAI P Vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitions arise under the Mysore Agricultural Income -tax Act, 1957, hereinafter called 'the Act'. Pursuant to a notice issued on 26th September, 1966, the petitioner filed two returns for the assessment year 1965 -66 and 1966 -67 furnishing only the extent of the areca gardens from which he derived agricultural income with their survey and sub -division numbers; but he did not furnish the particulars of the income, expenses, etc. In response to the Form No. 5 notice, the petitioner appeared before the respondents and produced before him copies of a registered partition deed dated 10th January, 1958, and three term lease deeds in respect of the areca gardens from which income is derived. On perusal of the documents produced by the petitioner and hearing his contentions the respondents came to the conclusions that there was only a partial partition in the family under the partition deed, dated 10th January, 1958, and that in respect of the properties described in schedule F of the partition deed there was no partition and the family held the properties as joint family properties. On the basis that the status of the assessee is that of the Hindu undivided family, the respondents computed the income derived from the areca gardens in question for the assessment years 1965 -66 and 1966 -67 and levied agricultural income -tax. Aggrieved by the said order, the petition has approached this court for the relief under article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE first ground urged in support of the writ petitions by Sri U. L. Narayana Rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that the petitioner derives agricultural income from land which is not more than 50 acres of eighth class of land specified in Part II of the Schedule to the Act, and therefore no agricultural income -tax is payable under the Act. The second ground is that the respondent, on an erroneous construction of the partition deed, has held that there was only a partial partition and that the areca gardens comprised in Schedule F of the partition deed are owned by the petitioner as karta of his Hindu undivided family consisting of the petitioner and his brothers, and that on a true construction of the partition deed it should be held that the petitioner and his three brothers own the areca garden as tenants -in -common.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the contentions urged in these writ petitions it is necessary to refer to the terms of the registered partition deed dated 10th January, 1968. That was a partition deed entered into between Gopal Pai and his four sons, via., Cheradappa Pai, Vittal Pai, Venkatesha Pai and Narasimha Pai.