Family, in relation to a person, includes the ascend-ant and descendant of such person. [Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (19 of 1976), s. 2(h)]. A group consisting of parents and their children; a group of person connected by blood by affinity, or by law, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 620.
In relation to an occupier, means the individual, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of such individual, and their children, brother or sister of such individual. [Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (61 of 1986), s. 2 (v)]
In relation to an operator, means his wife and dependant children and includes his dependent parents. [Dangerous Machines (Regulation) Act, 1983 (35 of 1983), s. 3 (g)]
Means:
(i) In the case of a male-subscriber the wife or wives, parents, children, minor brothers, unmarried sisters, deceased son's widow and children and where no parent of the subscriber is alive, a paternal grandparent: Provided that if a subscriber proves that his wife has been judicially separated from him or has ceased under the customary law of the community to which she belongs to be entitled to maintenance, she shall henceforth be deemed to be no longer a member of the subscriber's family in matter to which these rules relate, unless the subscriber subsequently intimates in writing to the Accounts Officer that he shall continue to be so regarded;
(ii) In the case of a female subscriber, the husband, parents, children, minor brothers, unmarried sisters, deceased son's widow and children and where no parent of the subscriber is alive, a paternal grandparent: Provided that if a subscriber by notice in writing to the Accounts Officer expresses her desire toe exclude her husband from her family, the husband shall henceforth be deemed to be no longer a member of the subscriber's family in matters to which these rules relate unless the subscriber subsequently cancels such notice in writing. [Employees' State Insurance Corporation (General Provident Fund) Rules, 1995), R. 2 (1) (f)]
The word 'family' in the context of a family arrange-ment is not to be understood in a narrow sense of being a group of persons who are recognised in law as having a right of succession or having a claim to a share in the property in dispute. If the dispute which is settled is one between near relations then the settlement of such a dispute can be considered as a family arrangement, S. Shanmugam Pillai v. K. Shanmugam Pillai, AIR 1972 SC 2069 (2076): (1973) 2 SCC 312: (1973) 1 SCR 570.
Family connotes a group of people related by blood or marriage. According to Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd Edn. the word 'Family' means the group consisting of parents and their children, whether living together or not; in wider sense, all those who are nearly connected by blood or affinity; a person's children regarded collectively; those descended or claiming descent from a common ancestor; a house, kindred, lineage; a race; people or group of people. According to Aristotle (Politics I), it is the characteristic of man that he alone has any sense of good and evil, or just and unjust, and the association of living beings who have this sense make a family and a State. It would follow from the above that the word 'Family' always signifies a group. Plurality of persons is an essential attribute of a family. A single person, male or females does not constitute a family. He or she would remain, what is inherent in the very nature of things. An individual, a lonely Wayfarer till perchance he or she finds a mate. A family consisting of a single individual is a contradiction in terms. S. 2(31) of the Income Tax Act,1961 treats a Hindu undivided family as an entity distinct and different from an individual and it would be wrong not to keep that difference in view, C. Krishna Prasad v. C.I.T., AIR 1975 SC 498: (1975) 1 SCC 160: (1975) 2 SCR 709.
The expression 'family' has according to the context in which it occurs a variable connotation. It does not in the setting of the rules postulate the existence of relationship either of blood or by marriage between the persons residing in the tenement. Even a single person may be regarded as a family, and a master and servant would also be so regarded. The expression 'family' has not a restricted meaning and under the rules imposing liability to pay conservancy tax and water rate liability is imposed upon every building, which expression includes a part of a building occupied as an independent unit irrespective of the nature of the user, Corporation of City of Nagpur v. Handloom Cloth Market Co. Ltd., AIR 1963 SC 1192 (1197): 1963 Supp 2 SCR 796.
The definition of 'family' in S. 2(f) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 which in relation to a person means the individual, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of such individual and their unmarried minor children, will not necessarily lead to concentration of wealth in the hands of a few persons or families. Such is not the intendment, nor the drive, nor the direct and inevitable consequence of the aforesaid definition of 'family', Maharao Saheb Shri Bhim Singhji v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 234 (237): (1981) 1 SCC 166.
The definition of 'family' as contained in S. 14K(c) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, is more realistic than the definitions of this term in similar laws for imposition of ceiling on agricultural holdings enacted in other States. The definition is much wider, and far more generous and humane because it takes into consideration the existence of a widowed and divorced daughter, which is absent in other Acts. The meaning given by Explanation I to an adult unmarried person is an inclusive one and it includes a daughter who has been divorced. This necessarily also includes a widowed daughter. By the proviso added to Explanation I, where such widowed daughter is the guardian of any minor son or unmarried daughter, or both, she, together with such minor son or unmarried daughter, or both, shall be deemed to be a separate family. She, therefore, is treated to be a raiyat in her own right in relation to her family and her holding is not clubbed with that of her father under S. 14M(2). The benefit provided to a divorced daughter would obviously also extend to a widowed daughter. Explanation II deals with the spouse as in relation to a raiyat who is a woman, reference in clause (c) to wife's son or daughter, shall be construed as reference to the husband's son or daughter, respectively of such woman. The legislature on a correct perspective has enlarged the definition of a family to the maximum possible extent, and provides for as many as nine members, Sasanka Sekhar Maity v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 522: (1980) 4 SCC 716: (1980) 3 SCR 1209.
'family' means:
(a) in the case of an individual who has a spouse or spouses, such individual, the spouse or spouses and their minor sons and unmarried daughters, if any;
(b) in the case of an individual who has no spouse, such individual and his or her minor sons and unmarried daughters;
(c) in the case of an individual who is a divorced person and who has not remarried, such individual and his minor sons and unmarried daughters, whether in his custody or not; and
(d) where an individual and his or her spouse are both dead, their minor sons and unmarried daugh-ters, S. Venkatappa v. Narayanappa, AIR 2001 SC 2148: (2001) 4 SCC 705. [Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, s. 2(A)(12)]
In Words and Phrases (Permanent Edition, Volume 16) at pages 303-11 the word 'family' has been defined thus:
The father, the mother, and the children ordinarily constitute a 'family'. The word 'family' embraces more than a husband and wife and includes children. A 'family' constitutes all who live in one house under one head. Father and mother of two illegitimate children, and children themselves, all living together under one roof, constituted a 'family' (pp. 303-04). The word 'family' in statute authorizing use of income for support of ward and 'family' is not restricted to those individuals to whom ward owes a legal duty of support, but is an expression of great flexibility and is liberally construed, and includes brothers and sisters in poor financial circumstances for whom the insane ward, if competent, would make provision (p. 311). The general or ordinarily accepted meaning of the word 'family', as used in Compensation Act, means a group comprising immediate kindred, consisting of the parents and their children, whether actually living together or not (p. 343). Similarly, in Webster's Third New International Dictionary, the word 'family' is defined thus: Household including not only the servants but also the head of the household and all persons in it related to him by blood or marriage... a group of persons of common ancestry (p. 821). In Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary (New Edition 1972), the word 'family' has been defined thus: The household, or all those who live in one house (as parents, children, servants): parents and their children. In Concise Oxford Dictionary (Sixth Edition), the same definition appears to have been given of the word 'family' which may be extracted thus: Members of a household, parents, children, servants, etc.; set of parents and children, or of relation, living together or not; person's children. All descendants of common ancestor,... A conspectus of the connotation of the term 'family' which emerges from a reference to the aforesaid dictionaries clearly shows that the word 'family' has to be given not a restricted but a wider meaning so as to include not only the head of the family but all members or descendants from the common ancestors who are actually living with the same head. More particularly, in our country, blood relations do not evaporate merely because a member of the family - the father, the brother or the son'leaves his household and goes out for some time, Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R.C. Bhasin, AIR 1982 SC 1091: (1982) 2 SCC 210: (1982) 3 SCR 670.
The considerations upon which pension proper is admissible or the benefit of the family pension has been extended do not justify the distinction envisaged in the definition of 'family' by keeping, the post-retiral spouse out of it, Bhagwanti v. Union of India, AIR 1989 SC 2088: (1989) 4 SCC 397: (1989) 3 SCR 1010.
In its ordinary and primary sense, the term 'family' signifies the collective body of persons living in one house or under one head or manager or one domestic government. In its restricted sense, 'family' would include only parents and their children. It may include even grandchildren and all the persons of the same blood living together. In its broader sense, it may include persons who are not connected by blood depending upon the context in which the word is used, K.V. Muthu v. Angamuthu Ammal, AIR 1997 SC 628: (1997) 2 SCC 53.
A son-in-law can be regarded as a member of the family because the word 'family' is not to be construed in a narrow sense or meaning only a member of a Hindu joint family, S.N. Sudalaimuthu Chettiar v. Palaniyandavan, AIR 1966 SC 469: (1966) 1 SCR 450.
The concept of family as it is commonly understood, taking into account the dictionary meaning of the expression. Collins, English Dictionary defines family as:
a primary social group consisting of parents and their offspring, the principal function of which is provision for its members. 'a group of persons related by blood; a group descended from a common ancestor.' The landholder, his wife and his offspring consisting of three minor sons and three minor daughters would certainly constitute a family even if the mother of the landholder is excluded from consideration, State of Gujarat v. Jat Laxmanji Talasji, (1988) 2 SCC 341: AIR 1988 SC 825 (828). [Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, (27 of 1961), s. 6 (3B)]
Must always be liberally and broadly construed so as to include near relatives of the head of the family. It would include not only the members of the landlord's family but also those persons who are dependent on him and whose responsibility he has accepted, Kanhaiyalal v. Bapurao, (1989) 1 AI RCJ 161; See also Dwarka Prasad v. Niranjan, (2003) 4 SCC 549.
As to include not only the head of the family but all members or descendants from the common ancestor who are actually living together in same house, Baldev Sahai Bangia v. R.C. Bhasin, (1982) 2 SCC 210: AIR 1982 SC 1091; Dwarka Prasad v. Niranjan, (2003) 4 SCC 549.
View Judgments Citing this Phrase View Acts Citing this Phrase