পাতা:ব্যবস্থা-দর্পণঃ প্রথম খণ্ড.djvu/৬৩৫

উইকিসংকলন থেকে
এই পাতাটির মুদ্রণ সংশোধন করা প্রয়োজন।

VYA V ASTHA”i]D AIRPAN A. 5}3 net visited by relatives or guests? Pistinct preparation of food, after an agreement in these words : • hence forward we are disunited, ° is partition. Afterwards their acts of religion, and wealth, or the like, received on some consideration relative to the father, are separate ; before that agrement they are single.” Coleb. Dig. vol. III. pp. 420, 421. In like manner, the question may be determined by their annual obsequies (for a deceased ancestor) and by their (separate ) worship of L Aksh M1 and other deities, and the like. Joid. p. 429. - - 彰 After this the author quotes the latter paragraph of the ΛΟαζγα όλαρα albove cited, viz.– “These and similar instances,” &c. Rajkishor Ray and/our others (sons of Kaoli Charan Roy), Appellants, versus // idow of Suonta Dao (son as Joy/cis/na Καχ), Respondent. Káli Charan, Joykrishna, and Shobhá Rám, were brothers. Shobhá Rám died, leaving a son, lta?dha^ Noath. Then died J oykrishna, leaving a son Sánta Dás. Then died Kálicharan, leavins: five sons Rojkish or Ráy, & ... the original defendants in suit. Káli Charn during his life conducted a banking house, which after his death was carried on by his eldest son Rajkishor, in concert with the other brothers. Sánta Dás, the cousin of these, (son of Joykrishna), was occasionally employed in transacting business for Rájkishor, and he, as well as his father received money for his private expenses from Kałicharn and Rajkishor; but does not appear to have received any specific share of the profits in trade ; or to have been present, at the balancing of the accounts; or to have been made acquainted with the profit or loss. The account books contain uo mention of the parties, except that, in the bahi Khasra", or day book, disburgements for private expenses are entered, which include the monthly expenses of santa Da4 and Radha Nath; the latter of whom was at the time engaged in a separate business, independent of his cousins. The three brothers, Katicharan, Joy krishna, and Shobha Rain, all messed apart ; as did also their respective heirs; but Santa Das, and Ita'dhanath continued to receive money ...for their private expenses from Rajkishor, for more than twenty years after the decease of their fathers; until disputes arising, they each claimed a third share of the trade which had been managed by Kalicharn and Rajkishor, together with a third of the household essects, money, and jewels, possessed by Rajkishor, alleging, that these were held by him and his father as joint and corismon property of the family; and resting their claim on the circumstanee of no separation of property having taken place between them or their fathers and Rajkish or or his father, and on their having continued to receive money for their expenses from the common fund managed by Rajkishor and his brothers. Thatojoykrishna and Shobaram, or their sons Santa Dass and Radha Nath, had any co-parcenery with Kaicharan or his son, or ever possessed any property jointly, with them, was denied by Rajkishor and his brothers; who pleaded, that the property, in their possession, was the produce of the exclusive and separate industry of their father and themselves. These being the circumstances, the Sudder bewanny Adawalnt consulted their pundits, whether, aeoording to the IIindu law of succession and partnership, the claim of Santa Dass, the originat plaintiff in this suit against Rajkishor Rasy, and his brothers, was, or was not maintenable ; f .