The proprietor of an ancestral landed estate died, leaving a widow and a daughter him surviving. Subsequently to his death, his widow took possession of the property by right of inheritance, and then she died, leaving the daughter before mentioned, who was a childless widow, and a son of her husband's paternal uncle. Now these two survivors claimed the inheritance; in this case, which of them is entitled to it, or are they both, and if so, in what proportions?

Property which had devolved on a widow at her hus

R. Under the circumstances above stated, according to law, the succession devolves on the son of the band's death, goes, paternal uncle, by whom the childless widowed daughter is excluded; but she is entitled to receive ood and raiment from the son of the paternal uncle of the proprietor. This opinion is conformable to the Dáya-bhága and other works of law.-Dacca Court of appeal, February 6th, 1808-Ibid. Case 6, (p. 46.)

when she dies, to the son of her husband's paternal uncle, to the exclusion of her childless widowed daughter.

Q.

I. A man died leaving a widow (A,) and a daughter (B,) who had two sons (C and D,) of whom the former died before his mother, leaving a widow, but no issue. In this case, has the widow of C, either during the life-time of B, or on her death, any right to the property left by the original proprietor? Or on the death of B, will the property devolve on D, or on his heirs, while C's widow is living?

The Claimants being a daughter or daughter's son, and the widow of a daughter's son, the latter will be excluded, and two first will inherit, in succession.

R. I. At the death of the original proprietor, who left no heir down to a great grandson, his widow was entitled to his property; and at her death, her daughter, B, had the right of inheritance, her son's (C's) widow having no right of succession; as her husband's property over his maternal grandfather's property could not have accrued during the life-time of his mother; but on the death of B, her son, D, is entitled to inherit the whole property of his maternal grandfather; and on his death, his heirs will take it, to the exclusion of C's widow. This opinion is conformable to the Dáya-bhága, Viváda-bhangárnava, and other authorities.

Authorities.-The text of JÁGNYAVALKYA and VISHNU. (See ante, pp. 23,24.)

Q. 2. On the death of the original proprietor, his widow made a gift of his entire property to her two grandsons C and D, while their mother,

that is the daughter (B) was living. In this case is the gift binding and good?

R. 2. Supposing the widow, during the life-time of her daughter B, to have made a gift of the whole property of her husband which devolved on her at his death by law of inheritance, without the express consent of her daughter, to her grandsons, the gift is illegal, as it is a settled rule, that the widow has only the right to enjoy her husband's property with moderation until her death. This is consonant to the doctrines cited in the Dàya-bhága and other law tracts.

Authorities.-the taxt of KÁTYÁYANA and that of Dóna-dharma, a chapter of the Mahá-bhárata. (See ante, pp. 45 & 48.)

Zillah Nuddea, March 8th, 1823. Ibid. Case 8, (pp. 47-49.) Khyamankarí Dásì versus Ananda-chander Gupta.

Q. Is a daughter's son entitled to inherit the estate of his maternal grandfather, while a childless widowed daughter of that ancestor exists?

A daughter's son excludes a daughter, being a childless widow and no heir.

R. The daughter's son is alone entitled to succeed his maternal grandfather, even though his daughter who is a childless widow is living, she being excluded by reason of her having neither husband nor issue.

Authorities:

The text of VRIHASPATI cited in the Dáya-bhága and other legal authorities. "As the ownership of her father's wealth devolves on her, although kindred exists; so her son likewise is acknowledged to be heir to his maternal grandfather's estate."

MANU.-"The maternal grandfather becomes in law the father of a son; let that son give the funeral cake, and possess the inheritance."

The true meaning of the preceding passage is, "that in default of daughters likely to have male issue, daughters who are barren, or widows destitute of male issue, are incompetent to take the inheritance, because they cannot benefit the deceased owner by offering (through the medium of sons) the funeral oblation at solemn obsequies.-Zillah Hoogly, July 1st, 1822. Ibid. Case 9, (pp. 49, 50.)

Ráj-chander Dás versus Musst. Dhan-mani.

Cases bearing on the vya

vastha No. 53.

I. A widow died after suing for her husband's property. The Sudder Court pronounced a decree in favor of her daughter. The Vyavastha upon which this decree was founded, was:-"The daughter was the legal heir, if she have a son or if there be any probability of her having one. Should she die without producing a son, her husband had no claim to the property which should (then) devolve on her father's heirs.-24th May, 1824. S. D. A. Rep. Vol. III. pp. 361–363.

See also the following cases :

Roy Shám-ballabh versus Prán-kishna Ghose.-4th July, 1825, S. D. A. Rep. Vol. III. p. 33. Ante, p. 5.

Gadá-dhar Sarmá, and Káli-dás Sarmá versus Ajodhyá-rám Choudhuri.-30th October, 1794, S. D. A. Rep. Vol. I. p. 6. post, p. 192.

Gangá-mayi versus Krishna-kishore Choudhuri. S. D. A. Rep. Vol. III. pp. 128 Cited in the Chapter treating of adoption. q. v.

Hári-dás Dutt, versus Rangan-mani Dásí and others. Ante, pp. 124-129.

Case

Roy Shám-ballabh versus Prán-kishna Ghose.

bearing on the vya

vasthàs Nos. 53, 60, 61.

Two maiden daughters of Jagat-ballabh succeeded into equal shares to his estate. Of these, one dying a childless widow, the other (as heir to the father of the deceased) took the vacant succession in preference to her father's brother's son.-29th March 1830, S. D. A. Rep. Vol. V, page 21.

Musst. Abhoya and another versus I'shwar-chander Gánguli.

Case

bearing on the vyavasthás Nos. 52&53.

A Hindu widow executed a testamentary deed of gift of the landed property which she inherited from her husband, in favor of her four daughters, granting them equal shares of the property to be entered on by them after her death. The daughter of one of the two daughters, who died during the life-time of the widow, sued the two surviving daughters, for a fourth share of the property in right of her deceased mother.

On consideration of all the documents, the Sudder Court (present, J. Fendall, and S. T. Goad) were of opinion that the deed of gift under which the plaintiff claimed a share of the property, was invalid, and that, as the title of her mother Apùrvá to the said property had never been completed, from her having died before her mother Lakhyćpriya (the said widow,) the plaintiff who claimed the property through her mother had consequently no right thereto, and accordingly dismissed the claim.-2nd April 1819, S. D. A. Bep. Vol. II. p. 290.

CASE NO. 137 OF 1862.

Mussammát Lakkhyí-mani Dási, (one of the Defendants,) Appellant, versus Tárá-maṇi Guptá, (Plaintiff,) and others,

Case

bearing on the vya

vasthá No. 56.

(Defendants) Respondents.

Plaintiff, Tárá-mani Guptá, and others, sued Lakkhymani Dásí for possession of a share in a talook by right of inheritance. The simple point of Hindu law in dispute in the Courts below was, whether the defendant, a childless widowed daughter, succeeds, in preference to the uncle's son, or first cousin, under Hindu law. The point was ruled adversely to the defendant, the daughter in the Court below; and she has now come up, urging the same point in special appeal. As, however, it is clear that, under Hindu law, the daughter inherits, not on account of relationship, but for the benefit she confers on the deceased by continuing the line of succession, it follows that the childless widowed daughter, who has no posibility of continuing the line of succession, can never inherit.

We reject the appeal, with costs.--The 29th July, 1862. H. C. A. part I. p. 67.

DAUGHTER'S SON'S RIGHT OF SUCCESSION.

63. On failure of the qualified daughter (d), Vyavastha the succession devolves on the daughter's son.*

Dá. krá. sang. p. 9.—Dá. bhá. Ch. XI. Sect. 2, paras. 17 & 19. pp. 189 & 190;→→→ Coleb. Dig. Vol. III. p. 498; -Macn. H. L. Vol. I. Ch. II. p. 23 & 25;-Elb, In. p. 77.

(d) By the expression" on failure of the qualified daughter" is here meant the failure of the maiden daughter, the daughter who has, and the daughter who is likely to have, a son; since the daughter's son inherits notwithstanding the existence of the daughter who is barren or who is a sonless widow.

Authority.

I. By that male child, whom a daughter, whether kritá or akritá, shall produce from a husband of equal class, the maternal grandfather becomes grandsire of a son's son: let that son offer the oblation-cake and possess the inheritance.† MANU. Ch. 1X. v. 136.

II. Let the daughter's son take the whole estate of the father (n) who leaves no son (p); and let him offer funeral oblations ;-one to his own father, the other to his maternal grandfather.+-MANU. Ch. IX. v. 132.

(n)

"Of the father"-that is, of the father of the mother. (See Dá. krá. sang. p. 10.)

(p) The term "leaving no son" is here used to signify failure of heirs as far as the daughter, otherwise it contradicts the text of JÁGNYAVALKYA: ("The wife, and the daughters," &c. Ante, p. 23,) and also the texts of other sages. (See Dá. krá. sang. p. 10.)

III. Between a son's son and the son of a daughter there is no difference in law; since their father and mother both sprung from the body of the same man.*-MANU. Ch. IX, v. 133.

IV. If one die leaving neither son nor grandson, the daughter's son shall inherit the estate; (for, by consent of all,) the son's son and the daughter's son are alike in respect of the celebration of obsequies.+-VISHŅU.

V. The maiden daughter, married daughter, and daughter's son, are all signified by the plural term "daughters" in JAGNYAVALKYA'S text :-"The wife and the daughters," &c. (Ante, p. 23.) As the word “son,

" in the phrase "who departed for heaven leaving no son,"

* Dá. bha. p. 190.— Dá. krá, sang. p. 10–Dá. T. p. 54.

† Dá. bha. p. 191;-Dά. T. p. 54;-Coleb. Dig. Vol. III. p. 498. This text is not found in the institutes of VISHNU. It is cited by Raghu-nandana in his Daya-tattwa as on the authoritity of Govinda-rá ja's quotation.