পাতা:ব্যবস্থা-দর্পণঃ দ্বিতীয় খণ্ড.pdf/৩০৭

উইকিসংকলন থেকে
এই পাতাটির মুদ্রণ সংশোধন করা প্রয়োজন।

WYAWASTHA.DARPANA. §§ 4 533. The above rule of preferentially adopting the nearest kinsman is, however, to render such adoption a laudable one, and not to invalidate the adoption of a stranger, while there was available a nearer kinsman for the purpose." The next case 1 shall mention, is one to which I have before alluded—one, in which the adoption by a Brahmin, of his sister's son, was declared valid. This decision was manifestly wrong, and opposite to all authority, except the deposition of some Pundits, who, by their testimony upon oath, led the Court into error—We ought not perhaps to blame the Judges before whom the cause of Itamuhunder Chatterjea t. Sulmboochunder Chatterjea (that is, the cause above alluded to ) was tried. The doctrine which prevailed in the case of Ramchunder Chatterjen r, Sumboochunder ("hatterjea, has been, I may say, overruled by a subsequent proceeding in the Supreme Court. Luckinaraen Tagore (a brithmin ) died possessed of considerable property, movable and immovable. Three wives, viz. Sreemotee Taramonec Dabee, Sreemotee Bhagobuttee Dabee, and Sreemotee Digumburee Dabee, survived him, and at the time of his death, he had not a child. • Where there is a brother's son, he should be selected for adoption in preference to all other on voluals : but this is not universally intopolisable, so as to invididate the adoption of a stranger 1, the case of ()onian Putt, paupor, appellaut, r, Kuuhi. Singh, it was held that, while a brother's on exists, the adoption of any other individual is illegal : and this is undoubteilly consonant to to doctrine contained in the Duttaku-Minánsá, but it is controverted in the Daiiaka-Chandriká It would appear, however, that, according to the law of Bengal and elsewhere, where the doctrine of the latter authority is chiefly followed, and where the doctrime of “factum palet exiwt», w brother'» , o, may be superseded in favour of a tranger; and even in Benares, and the places where the Muminoá principally obtains, and where a prohibitory rule has in laot instances the effect of law, s, as to invalidate an act done in contravention thereto, the adoption of a brother's son (or ...ther near relative is not essential, and the validity of an adoption actually made does not rust on the rigul observance of that rule of selection, the choice of him to be adopted being a matter of discretion to may he held, them, that the injunction to adopt one's own wapitulas. (a brother's son is the first, ) and failing theta, to adopt out of one s own gotra, is not essential, so as to invalidate the adoption in the event of departure from the rule, Maen H, I, vol. 1. pp. 68,09. lf duly authorised, the widow may no dault adopt, and is enjoined to give the preference to the nearest relation who is eligible. (Seo Dittaka. Asuminsti, ) But the validity of an adoption actually inade, does not rest on the rigid observance of that rule of selection ; the choice of him to be adopted being a matter of discret on “Colebrook's remark. Str. li. L. vol. I? p. 74. The general law, however, which governs {h, choice of a son for adoption, is that the adopter may legaliy take hini from his own. " 'rou a different qutra . but he ought conscientiously to take him from his own ; and, it preferene", from his sayindow ( or near kindred : ) or. in default of these, from hi. samánolakas, or sakulyas ( degrees of reinute kindred. ) if, however, a person choose to revers ths. presertied order, though he thereby contracts a sinful taint. hr di» s jy t rfyetir 1-gal Anitnaiversint, ut ,of any person what over ارا ، and 1 doiibt if it, wi»ulil be for the king, at the ، )) ايالا اندران ، to provent the completion of the at certainly it could not be reversed funer performed stemark by Mr Ellis Ibid. pp. 74, 7% It is not incumbent on a person to adopt the soil of a brother, or other tapinda. The law more, states this as preseeable, but without prescribon: it, certainly it dues not give t. the нарinda ativ n:ht to enforce such a preference, and the also could not, therefore I am clear, maintail this action –Ibid. p. 80 د،Wy a y :۱۹۹i t’ \'s #, ٠ ؛!t ، ::١:al 1')(لو Vyavasthas N, $21, & so