History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.670

v4.c63.670

The father is not bound to pay his son's personal debt; the husband is not liable to pay the wife's debt, nor the wife her husband's or son's. But in all these cases if the debt is incurred for the benefit or purposes of the family by the son, the wife or the husband then the father, husband or wife respectively would be liable (Yāj. II. 47, Nār. IV. 10-11, Kāt. 545, 579)⁷⁶¹. If the father promised to pay his son's individual debt or if he approved or acquiesced in it he was liable to pay it. Manu VIII. 167, Yāj. II. 45, Nār. IV. 12, Bṛ. (S. B. E. 33 p. 329 v. 50), Kāt. (545) provide that a debt incurred for the purposes of the family by any one such as the son, brother, uncle, the wife, the mother, the pupil or a servant or a slave even without the consent of the head of the family when he has gone abroad, should be paid by the head of the family. This liability and the liability when the manager of a family contracts a debt for the benefit or necessities of the family arise from agency (*implied*) or authority. Kauṭ. (III. 11) holds that the husband may be seized (for work)