VYAVASTHA”-DARPANA. 615 Calcutta Court of Appeal. Nanda Ram versus Ramtanu Mukariya. Macn. H. L. vol. 3II. Ch. 8, Case 88, pp. 245, 240. ബം - Q. A person, on the death of his son and wife, having reserved some landed property which descended to him from his forefaullers, for the maintenance of his sisters and their sons, disposed of the remaining portion, by a deed of gift in favour of his spiritual teacher or his in, the deed being executed with the consent, and in the presence, of his . sisters, but mot of their sons. In this case, is the gift legal? R. Under the circumstances stated, the gift must be considered good and valid. According to the Hindu law, a man who has neither a வி, nor a son’s son, nor a great grandson, is competent to give away his ancestral real estate, even though there be his other relations living : in this case, the sisters’ or their sons' consent is superfluous. Zillah Burdwan, July 26th, 1823. Maen. H. L. vol. II. Cha. 8, Case 44, pp. 252, 253. Q. A person having an adult son, without that son's consent disposed of by gift to a stranger a part of his maternal grandfather's dependant landed estate, the zemindar or proprietor of which had dispossessed him, conditioning in the deed, that if he (the donee) could recover possession of the property, he might exercise proprietory right over it, and (the donor) would have no concern with it. The domee having recovered the estate, in this case is the deed of gift binding and legal? and if so, is the donor's son's property divested in virtue of the gift? or on the death of the donor, will,his son acquire the right of ownership 2 ... * * * R. Under the circumstances stated, the donor was competent to give his maternal grudfather's immovable property, which devolved on him by succession, to a stranger, and the right is complete and binding. There is no law that the daughter's son's son sham inherit, consequently the donor's son has no right to annul the gift. This opinion is conformable to the Dayabhaga, Viva dachinta mawi, Dayarakashya, and other works of law. Authorities :— The text of Vrihaspati, cited in the Viva dachinta'mani : “Of houses and of land acquired by any of the seven modes of acquisition, whatever is given away should be delivered, distinguishing land as it was left by the father, or gained by the occupier himself. At his pleasure he may give what himself aequired.” It is laid down in the Doyabкада, that “ therefore, since it is denied that a gift or sale should be made, the precept is infringed by making one. But the gift or transfer is not null: for a fact cannot be altered by a hundred texts.” The passage of Shankha, quoted in the Daoyaokashya: “Land inherited in regular விes. sion, but which had been formerly lost, and which a single (heir) shall recover solely by his own labour, the rest may divide according to their due allotments, having first given him a fourth part.” Maen. ii. L. vol. ii. cha. 8, case 47, pp. 255, 250. Q. A proprietor of a ten-anna share of a landed estate had a son, who died before him, leaving a widow and three daughters. The said proprietor having brought the appellant from a oertain place, gave him in -marriage to one of his three granddaughters, and presented him with his entire share of the property as a joutais gift (property given at a marriage), by a deed; and it is also proved that the appellant took possession of the property so given, and sold a two The gift of a paternal estate is valid without the consent of sisters' sons, Å person having a non may make a gist of his o.o.maternal grandfather 5 landed property, which had been usurped, on condition of the domee's recovering it.
