WYAWASTElA-DARPANA. $76 Inasmuch as of the sons so adopted only the first was received when the husband was destitute of male issue, but he being the father of a son immediately aster the first adoption, the law does not permit the adoption of another son for him; consequently, all stilsequeut adoptioنادر during the existence of the son first adopted are invalid. Although some of the modern pundits are of opinion that the act of receiving permission to adopt is equal to being pregnaut,” yet the opinion does not it]opear to bu of any weiglit, as it has not been recognised in any of the law tracts respected as authority. By parity of reasoning too, the art in question does not appear to be equal to pregnancy —sor had it been so, the acts to he performed under that permission would always be donc similarly or consistently with pregnancy; that is to say, a son would be adopted neither long 懿}独 long after the time for giving birth to a child, but just after the **Piry of the periad of gestation, and not to adopt a son would be impossible. In fact, this opinion of the pondits has not been accepted in the administration of justice. * In the case of Gource Prosaud rersus Joymalaf it appears that the husband, aster adopting a son in conjunction with one of his wives, had confirmed his permission already given to another wife to adopt, and the adoption made under such permission during the existence of the son already alopted was declarol valid by the Sul ter Court; but such adoption was by no means v..! according to the Hindu law, and the devision declaring the validity thereof is certainly inconsistent with that I, tw. The decision passed by the Privy Council, whereby the adoption of a s” on son during th existone of the first has been held to be invalid, appears to be in strict conformity with the law, and decisive on the point. 511 Authorised by her husband to adopt a son, a woman may adopt at ally time when a boy fit to be adopted is procurable, Since there is no period fixed within which a son is to be adopted. 512 But if a wife, authorised to adopt, do not adopt a son, notwithstanding a ריה boy fit to be adopted were to be had, then she becomes guilty of discontinuing the oblations of food and libations of water, and extinguishing the lineage. There is on this subject a Pyarasská in Macnaghten's work on the Hindoo Liw, yol, II as follows.— Q. A person, previously to his death, gave directions to his two wives that they should each accept a son in adoption, Subsequently to his death, his elder wife di not accept a son, and the two widows equally divided his estate. The elder widow made n gift of her whole share to a stranger, and died. Afterwards the younger widow received a boy in adoption. In this case, will the share of the elder widow go to the donee, or will it devolve on the adopted som of the younger widow ? .س-- -- --- r ------- بیایید بچی-تحتعجم **
- See Ranee Kishenmance vertus Rajah ()odwant Singh and Jankee Singh, S, D. A. R. vol. IlI. p. 228, and Turinee Debea tersu? I}amam Dous Mookerjea and others, S. D. A. R., 30th September, 1850 t S. D. A. R. vol. I. p. 130.
47 Vyavasthm”. Reason Wyavaktha?
