WYAVASTHA-DARPANA. los decrees were, first, that the adoption of the respondent Ramkishor, being a second adoption in the family of the same man, was illegal; second, that, even admitting two to be legal, one adopted son could not succeed to the property of the other adopted son, as the collateral heir. The questions of Hindoo law, connected with the case, were proposed by the Court a their pundits in the following form: “After the death of Kishenkiho, seminor of the am, estate, without issue, his elder widow having adopted Nundkishor; and when the elder widow, and Nundkishor died, his younger widow having adopted Ramkishor; and claims to the estate his. ing open preferred by Ramkishor; by Joogulkishor, the adopted son of Kishonki-hor's brother: and by Sham Ghunder and Rooler Chunder, sons of Kishonkishor's half brother; which as the claimants is heir at law to the property? and in the case of two adopted sons of a rootnon adop. tive father, can one, on the decease of the other, succeed to his property as the colla ral heir " In answer to this reference, it was by the pundits, that “is, after the death of ki.honki-ji, o, his elder widow, duly authorised, adopted a son, that son was proprietor of the estate; and if, *s, * the death of that son, the younger widow also adopted a son, under due authority, then, pro led the adopted son of the elder widow left no issue, or brother by the mother who adopted him, h;4 property would devolve on the adopted son of the younger widow of Kishenki-hor, and Hot on to alopted son of Kishenkishor's brother, or on the sons of his half brother, The alopted on is vested in the other adopted son, as being the nearest collateral.” Th, Co: Sulder Dewanny Adawlut agreાં with the Provincial Court of Daeva, with topo, ; tı, to a .4. tion of Rankishor by Narayni Debeh being proved to have the above opinion': the pundits, it appeared that two adoptions in the family of the on "o are valid; that an adopted son succeeds collaterally as well as lineally in the family of lii. 9" ... tive father; and that Ramkish or was the rightful heir to the who anna esta!, in c. 1, ... . . the claim preferred to it by the appellants was pronounced to be inadmissible. The app. al vs. in consequence dismissed by the Sudder Dewanny Adawlut, with costs. (a) August 2 -t, so – S. D. A. R. vol. 1. p. 209. Iharoen Joy, dogs.d, in h. /are Srecith Mier, son of Musst. So mayo fis“, dan jhter of Dharaen sty, appeltant (plaiatisf, ) versus Mus. Kroon..... (vihar, ) daughter of /), haargen Roy decrwed, in her }//co Ki-4, , //dial, λίiήίκλοι, αηd Sκι Ενήrn, Μ. r 'δην, Εντμοn lmf», (lரிாது.) Delmaraen Itoy sued Heeramonce in the Calcutta Court of Appeal, to recover the sun to rupees 10,182-6 annas, due on a bond. Whilst the suit was pending, the plaintiff died; and his four daughters, Soolainoyee, Kewulnnnee, Anundmoyee, and Serlisvonderee, claiined to br j ut in his place, as his ileirs. This was done. Subsequently, Soodamiyeo died; and her on, the present appellant, came in her place and compromised the case with the defendant. Kwei - • મેં ત * с munee appealed summarily from the decision founded on the compromis“; and, oli tlie 11th { August 1839, Mr. Reil ordered that Kewulmunee's claim as a plaintiff shot!..] be investigated, and the case re-admitted on the sile for that purpose. The case then stood thus: as the defend. (a) The right of a son by adoption to inherit from his collaterals, in the family of his adoptive father, was established by the decision in this cause, as well as the lawfulness of two wre...ive adattions, by the widows of the same person, under authority for that purpose from: their husiasti (Note by the Reporter, that is, Sir William Macnaghton.) } 05 í \ F . ; , 1 : !! : : uso há N < 0
