WYAVASTHA-DARPANA. S{}{ the legality of two successive adoptions by two wives under authority from their husband, which corresponds with the decision in the case of Shamchuuder and Rooderchunder rersus Narawnee 1) heh and Ramkishore, (ville Vol, 1, page 8ö,) the decree of the Provincial Court in favour „t illo respondent appeared just and proper. It was accordingly affirmed by the Sudder Dowamy Atlawlut, (present J. H. Harington.)* Deeember 12th, 1814. S, D. A. lì. Vol. II. բ. 136. This was an action of ejectment, brought by the two daughters of A, B., a deceased proprietor of the property in question, to recover the premises as “et out in a bill of particulars as having belonged to their father. To complete the plaintills' case a question was asked of the pondits. Quere, A man dies leaving landed property, a widow, and three daughters, but no male issue; one of those daughters has a son born during her father's life time, Quere, who is entitled to possession at the father's death A. The widow is entitled to an estate for life, and after her death the unmarried daughters have equal shares: the daughter that is married in her father's lifetime is not entitled to any. 1; one daughter had been married, and the other not, at the father's death, no intervention of the widow's estate having occurred, the unmarried daughter would have succeeded solely. torquxson, for the defendant, stated that his client cluimed, as the adopted son and heir of the loveased A, B., and it was proved that he had been so adopted by the widow of A. B., after his death, according to instructions given to her for this purpose by him during his lifetime. And several witnesses sword to having heard A, B, invest his wife with a power to appoint him (defendant) an adopted son after his death. The following questions were here put to the Pandits, Ist. Whether any written authority was necessary to be given by the husband, to entitle is widow to adopt A, No. 2ndly. Are any ceremonies usual on such occasion of deputing : A. No, it may be merely verbal; but if there were no other witness of the widow's having received such a power from her husband but the widow herself, she would not be believed, and could not prove it. 3rdly. Whether, if there be living a son of the deceased's daughter at the time of his death, any other can be adopted 2 A. Yes, any stranger even, without restriction. Thus the power of tige widow to adopt, as she had done, a stranger after her husband's death, ły virtue of a general power, being established, and the fact of adoption being proved, there remained only a few questions more of Hindoo law to put the lessors of plaintiff out of Court. Here the following question was asked of the Pundits:— Q. May such a power of adoption, delegated to the widow, be exercised at any time after her husband's death A. Yes, so it be in the widow's lifetime.
- The Zillah decision in this case is consonant with the law: the other decisions do not seem to be so The inaccuracy of the Sudder decision in this case will be perceived on perusal of the Privy Council decision in the Madras case hereinafter printed.
("ASE bearing on the Vyavastiá, Now, 500, 502, 505,596, & 511.
