Liabilities of The Members of A Joint Hindu Family
It is generally presumed that money required for carrying on family business is a family necessity and that the business is carried on with the consent or acquiescence of all the members of the family. Thus, if debts are incurred by the Manager in the ordinary course of the family business, all the coparceners become liable. However, their liability is limited to the extent of their interest in the family property and not beyond that. No doubt, the adult coparceners become personally liable when they themselves are actually contracting parties along with the Manager, or if they ratify the contract entered into by the Manager, except in the case of a minor coparcener, who does not become personally liable unless the contract is ratified by him after attaining majority.
Read more about this topic: Hindu Undivided Family
Famous quotes containing the words liabilities, members, joint and/or family:
“Are we bereft of citizenship because we are mothers, wives and daughters of a mighty people? Have women no country—no interests staked in public weal—no liabilities in common peril—no partnership in a nation’s guilt and shame?”
—Angelina Grimké (1805–1879)
“This will not be disloyalty but will show that as members of a party they are loyal first to the fine things for which the party stands and when it rejects those things or forgets the legitimate objects for which parties exist, then as a party it cannot command the honest loyalty of its members.”
—Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962)
“No Government can be long secure without a formidable Opposition. It reduces their supporters to that tractable number which can be managed by the joint influences of fruition and hope. It offers vengeance to the discontented, and distinction to the ambitious; and employs the energies of aspiring spirits, who otherwise may prove traitors in a division or assassins in a debate.”
—Benjamin Disraeli (1804–1881)
“Our family talked a lot at table, and only two subjects were taboo: politics and personal troubles. The first was sternly avoided because Father ran a nonpartisan daily in a small town, with some success, and did not wish to express his own opinions in public, even when in private.”
—M.F.K. Fisher (1908–1992)