WYAVASTHA-DARPANA. 2דל ste kindred; and such a gift, having by them been presented through kindness, that the women possessing* may live well, is declared by law to be their absolute property. The absolute exclusive dominion of women over such a gift is perpetually celebrated; and they have power to sell or give it away, as they please, even though it consist of lands and houses.” Kātyāyana : “Neither the husband, nor the son, nor the father, nor the brothers, have power to use or to aliene the legal property of a woman.” Zillah Nuddea, July 26th, 1820. Maen. H. L. Vol. II. Ch. VIII. Case 6, pp, 212, 218. q. There were two brothers of the whole blood, who had some ancestral rent-free lands. The elder had an only daughter, but no son, and the younger had two sons. The elder disposed of his daughter in marriage, and either gave a part of the landed estate for his daughter's maintenance, or the daughter, on the death of her father, acquired it by right of succession. The mode of its coming into her possession does not clearly appear. Under these circumstances, is she competent to make a gift of such property to a stranger, without the consent of her paternal uncle's sons? R. If one of the brothers, having contracted his only daughter in marriage, gave a certain londed property quantity of land out of his ancestral landed estate for her support, and the daughter took posses. '! ಸ್ಧ! 臀 * sion by right of such donation, in this case, she is competent to give it away to a stranger with- absolutely Hot N) tbut which she ac out the sanction of her father's brother's two sons, as that property is termed the gift of affec- . - - - quires by inheritano, tionate kindred, over which her independency is recognized. If, on other hand, the property became hers by succession, she had no power to give it without her father's nephew's consent. This is consonant to the authorities prevalent in Bengal. Authorities —The texts of Åsityūyana, laid down in the Dáyabhāga, Ilāyakramwangraha, and other tracts:– “That which is received by a married woman or a maiden, in the house of her hus.band or of her father, from her husband or from her parents, is termed the gift of affectionate kin. dred. The independence of women who have received such gifts is recognized in regard to that property; for it was given by their kindred to soothe them, and for their maintenance. The power of women over the gifts of their affectionate kindred is ever celebrated, both iu respect of donation and of sale, according to their pleasure, even in the case of immovables.” The following is a passage of the Dáyabhāga : “Het her enjoy with moderation the property mntil her death. After her, let the heirs take it.” “The word ' wife' is employed with a general import; and it implies, that the rule must be understood as applicable generally to the case of a woman's succession by inheritance.” Zillah Heerbboom. Ma. H, L. Vol. II. Chap. VII. Cawe. VIII. pp. 214, 21$. Rän Duäl Sarks und anole versus Srinal Joyman lei. This was an issue to try whether a certain paper writing, addressed to the plaintiffs, was thise the will of Rádha'kånt Chátterjea. In the course of the trial a witness of the name of Ishān- hearing on the vy. “handra was called, on the part of the plaintiffs, to support the will ; against whom it was oh. `ೋಹ್ಲಿ Хон. 431 jected that he was interested, because maintenance was devised to his wife by the will, and the and #32. husband was by law entitled to receive it. Whereupon this question was put by the Court to the Pandits — Q. If a legacy be given to a married woman, has her husband any interest in it A. If the legacy be given to her by the relations of her husband, or by her own relations, it is Stridhana, and the husband has no right to it; but if given to her by a stranger, she cannot part with her interest in it without her husband's consent. --
