পাতা:ব্যবস্থা-দর্পণঃ প্রথম খণ্ড.djvu/৭৫১

উইকিসংকলন থেকে
এই পাতাটির মুদ্রণ সংশোধন করা প্রয়োজন।

- WYAVASTHA’-DARPANA. 629 estate which is in common, himself signing for his four brothers, as well as his own name, in the deed of sale? and supposing him to have sold it, is the sale legal or otherwise? R. If of the brothers some are adult and others minors, the eldest is competent to sell the paternal immovable property for the maintenance of his minor brothers, for the performance of their initiatory ceremonies and so forth, for the excquial rites of his father, and for the discharge of the debts incurred by the father; but excepting under these circumstances, he cannot sell any portion exceeding his own share. If he should have made the sale, excépting under thoso circumstances, it must be considered void. Zillah Beerbhoom, August 20th, 1818. Maen. H. L. vol. II. Ch. 11. Case 6, pp. 296, 207. Q. There were three uterime brothers in joint possession of some ancestral landed property; one of them staid at home to conduct the affairs of the family, and superintend the estate, and the other two proceeded to a foreign, country to obtain office. In this case, is the brother who manages the estate, entitled to sell or mortgage the property for a certain term, while the other brothers are at a distance? R. If two of the three associated brothers, having left a brother at home to manage their joint property, proceeded to a distant country to obtain office, the managing brother may mortgage and sell the whole or a part of the undivided patrimonial property for the support of the family and religious purposes, even though there be no consent on the part of his co-parceners; in like manner as he may, without his brothers' sanction, dispose of his own share for the maintenance of his own dependants. This is conformable to the Dayabhaga, Dayakramasangraha, and other legal authorities. Authorities:— “But if the family cannot be supported without selling the whole immovable and other property, even the whole may be sold or otherwise disposed of.” Vilihat MANU :—“The support of persons who should be maintained, is the approved means of attaining heaven: but hell is the man's portion if they suffer. Therefore (let the master of a family) carefully maintain them.” This is the doctrine contained in the Dayabhaga. ff should even a slave make a contract (in the name of his absent master) for the behoof of the family, that master, whether in his own country or abroad, shall not rescind it.” Dayakramatangraha. “But in time of distress, for the support of his household, and particularly for the performance of religious duties, even a single co-pareener may give, mortage, or sell the immovable estate.” “If a debt be incurred by a slave for the support of the family of his master, it must be discharged by the master.” This is the opinion of the author of the h ira dackinta znani. Calcutta Court of Appeal, January 13, 1817. Macn. H. L. vol. II. Ch. 11. Cas': 10, pp. 800–308. Circumstances undeo, which a sale of the paternal estate by the eldest son, during the mi- , nority of his brothers, is valid. The sale by the managing parcener of an entire estate is valid in a case of necessity.