WYAVASTHA-DARPANA, 818 On the death of a maiden daughter, or of one diffianced, in whom the succession (to the stridhun) had vested, and who, having been subsequently married, is ascertained to have become barren, or a widow without giving birth to a son, the property which has passed to her from the mother as an inheritance, would devolve next on the sisters, having, and likely to have, male issue, and, in their default, on the barren and widowed sisters, not on the husband of such daughter (as above mentioned in whom the succession had vested.)—For the right of the husband is relative to the woman's separate property, and wealth which has in this way passed from one to another, being ancestral ploperty that has descended by inheritance, can no longer be considered as the ‘woman's separate property.”—See W. Da', Kra. Sang, pp. 46, 47. Delhřith Sandial and others versus Patrick Maitland and Ilenry William Droz, executors of Rasbehury Surmono. The bill stated among other things that a legacy of 5000 supees, left to the wife, lapsed, as Case she burned herself with the body of her husband, which act of burning related back to the time hearing on the vy. of her husband's death, aud she is supposed, by the laws, customs, and usages of Ilindus, to have voth. No. 479 died simultaneously with her husband; and that the 5000 rupees left to the wife is part of the residue of the testator's estate. The bill prays that the will may be established, that the trusts thereof be decreed and carried into execution, that an account be taken, that the legacy of 5000 rupees left to the wife be declared lapsed, and that the residue be declared to belong to the three grandsons, &c. The court did not concur in the statement of the Ilindu law, as it was given by the complain. ants in their hill. The wife who had burned herself with her husband was not admitted to have constructively died at the same time with him, and her legacy did not go to the residue of his estate, but was decreed to her daughters as her representatives. March 1820. Cons, II. L. pp. 371-374. Prankishen Sing, appellant, versus Museummat Bhugwutee, (widow of Juginohun Ghuse,) steppudent. In the Bengal year i 161, Gourung Sing made over to his daughter Anund-moyce, on her Case - - - - & 8 hearing on the Wvs. tirely from his own possessions; that he made it over to his said daughter; that she was to get វ្នំ No. 480. marriage with Jugmohun, a tulook and tank, by a deed of gift, reciting, that he separated it en it registered in her husband's name, and hold it as her property. The tutook was registered in the khilsu in the name of Jugmohun; and a sunud was granted conformable to the terms of the gist, by the existing Government. Anund-moyee died in 1163, without issue male, but left a daughter and that daughter's husband. The daughter died in 1176, leaving a daughter, now living, a widow without issue. Gourung Sing died in 1164, leaving an adopted som Rádhákaunt, who subsequently died. Jugmohun died in 1196, leaving an adopted son, and Bhugwutee, his third wife. It would appear that after the death of his wife Anund-moyee, Jugmohun held the property in question till his decease; and that it was then taken possession of by his widow Bhugwutee,
- The above passage slightly differs from Mr. Wynch's translation, which does not appear to be an *curate and faithful one of the Sanskrit text, contained in his own edition as well as in the other edition
of the work, q.v. 廳
