The Calcutta Weekly Notes Law Notes and Notes of Cases of the Calcutta High Court and of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and Short Notes of Important Decisions of other High Courts in India Monday December 30 1935

The clarity lies in the manner in which the concepts of severance of status and actual partition are distinguished; but considerable obscurity shrouds the appliction of those concepts to the particular facts of the case. [...] in the Court of Appeal who held that the insttution of the partition suit was without more sufficient to effect a severanee of the joint family and the fact that at the time of the mortgage decree no preliminary decree had yet been passed in the partition suit made no difference. [...] Thus far the argument is clear and logical and applied to the particular facts before the Judicial Committee the consequence would be that since at the institution of the mortgage suit there had been only a seveance of status but no actual partition and since therefore no rights to the ownership of any share had then arisen in favour of the female members the mortgage decree subsequently made [...] If between the institution of the mortgage suit and the decree passed therein an actual partition had taken place the female members acquiring the ownership of certain shares by such partition would be in the position of transferees pendenie lite of a part of the equity of redemption and it is difficult to see why they would not he bound by the mortgage decree. [...] The sequence of events it will be remembered was first the institution of the partition suit then the mortgage suit then the mortgage dcree and lastly the partition decree.