CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Vs. JAMEELA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE point involved in this reference relates to the inclusion of a sum of Rs. 4,07,300, representing the value of the property known as "Albany" in the estate of the deceased, Mrs. Fathima Bi. THE said property originally belonged to one Amirunnissa Begum, wife of Shamsudeeri Sahib. By a deed of settlement dated August 21, 1947, she settled the property absolutely in favour of her husband, Shamsudeen Sahib. He, in turn, executed a settlement deed dated May 15, 1950,, under which he conveyed the same to his daughter, Jameela Begum, with absolute rights subject to a condition that the settler during his lifetime, and, after his death, his second wife, Fathima Bi, during her lifetime, shall be entitled to the income realised from the property. On the death of Shamsudeen Sahib in October, 1950, the legal heirs of his pre-deceased wife, Amirunnissa Begum, challenged the validity of the settlement deed dated August 21, 1947, in C. S. No. 38 of 1956 before the High Court. In the said suit, Fathima Bi was appointed by court as receiver in respect of the property. Later, there was a compromise between Jameela Begum, the settlee, under the settlement deed dated May 15, 1950, and the legal heirs of Amirunnissa Beguta, the result of which was that Jameela Begum's title to the property was recognised. Even during the pendency of the said litigation, Fathima Bi died on January 24, 1957.

(2.) JAMEELA Begum, the accountable person, filed a statement of accounts in respect of the properties that passed on the death of Fathima Bi In this statement she included a sum of Rs. 4,07,778, representing the value of the said property. On the basis of the said statement, the original assessment was completed on March 29, 1962, on a principal value of Rs. 4,31,548. The accountable person, however, preferred an appeal to the Appellate Controller against the said assessment for the first time contending that the value of the property "Albany" has been wrongly included in the estate of the deceased. As this objection was not. raised before the Assistant Controller, the Appellate Controller set aside the assessment with a direction that a fresh assessment be made according to law.

(3.) THE accountable person having given up her contention that she acquired title to the property only under the compromise decree in C. S. No. 38 of 1956, and not under the settlement deed dated May 15, 1950, even before the authorities below, it has to be taken that she is claiming title to the property only under the settlement deed dated May 15, 1950, THE two reasons given by the Tribunal for holding that the deceased, Fathima Bi, had no interest in the property in question are : (1) the condition regarding the payment of the income from the property to the settler and his wife is invalid and inoperative under Section 11 of the Transfer of Property Act and, therefore, neither the settler nor Fathima Bi get any valid interest in the property under the settlement deed ; and (2) that in any event the reservation of the usufruct after the settler's death in favour of Fathima Bi for her life is invalid under the Mohammedan law as amounting to a gift in future.