WYAVASTHA-DARPANA ኬ ♥ ♥ ! Gunyapersand Roy, (Pleistis, ) Appellast, versus Brijeuvres Głowdirais, Bwswareeloli Roy snd otiers, f Deféndata,) Respondente, The plaintiff, calling himself the next male heir to Goursoonder Roy deceased, sought b, this action to secure possession of his zemindaree, on the ground that Brijeasure, the widow in possession, had adopted Bunwareeloll without any permission, and was doing other act prejudicial to his rights as next heir to the property. The defence denies that Bunwarce's adoption is without permission; but even if it be to Bumwareeloll denies any right in the plaintiff as heir of Goursoonder. The preferable heir was alleged to be Kistobeharee Roy, son of the decesed Gourmonder, maternal unele. The plainti! replied that Kistobeharee could not be the heir of Goursoonder, who was himself an adopted son, first, because Kistobeharee's father and the adopting mother of Goursoonder were not own brother and sister, but by different wives; second, because an adopted son could not be succeeded by the maternal relatives of the adopting family, The Zillah Judge, after consulting the pundit, who said that, "in either ovent, the plaintiff could not represent Goursoonder in preference to Kistobehatee, who is undoubtedly the next heir.” decided the guit by dismissing the plaintiff's claim, on the ground that he was not entitled to sue as the heir of Goursoonder. It was intimated to the (Sudder) Court that plaintiff's appeal involved no question of fact, and was preferred only on the point of Hindoo law involved in the ..lower Court's judgment. The case was therefore called up and heard under section 12, Act XV. of 1858, Appellant's pleader admits that the line of successive heirs demarcated would be followed if Gourgoonder had been the natural born son of Kishensoonder, but he denies the right of the maternal relations to succeed in the case of an adopted son. He argues that adoption is the act of the man, and can be done without marriage, but can never be done by the woman without the avnross permission of her husband. The pleader refers to the case of Gunga Mya, page 128, vol. III, of the 'Select Reports,” and page 187, vol. II. of Micnaghten's Hindu I, turt, and res. sons from this by analogy that, as the adopted son in declared to be no heir of the adoptive mother, neither can she take the estate of the adopted son on failure of nearer heirs in her husband's family, g o Baboo Rumapersaud Roy entered into a long and elaborate expinnation of the findno hy of inheritance. As the only question before us was one of pure Hindoo law, we did not ເກ. ourselves competent to decide the point, without calling for a byvustha from the pundit of the Court. As it appeared to us that the point must be decided on the general ground of,-whether an adoptive mother's relations succeeded an adopted son under the same circumstances that would govern their succession to a natural born son,-we put the question in that form, and the reply of the pondit being in the affirmative, and the authorities quoted derived from well recognised works on Hindoo law, we have seen no reason to interfere with the judgment passed by the lower Court, and uphold it, with costs against the appellant.—Sudder Dewanny Adwalat Reports, 30th of July 1859. • 4*, p, 159. + Aante. p. 1100. (103) ("ASE Boaring on th Ywawaaf }.& Na Mt\ft
