YELLA THIPPANNA Vs. YELLA VENKATARAMANAPPA OF UNSOUND MIND BY GUARDIAN, SRI M. GURUSWAMY AYYAR, ADVOCATE APPOINTED AS MANAGER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE property which is the subject -matter of the suit out of which this appeal arises belonged to one Chinnayya. The plaintiff claims to be a son of Chinnayya by a permanently kept concubine. The first defendant is the legitimate son of Chinnayya, a man of feeble intellect. The second defendant is his wife. The third defendant, who is the husband of Gangamma, a daughter of Chinnayya, claims to have been taken into the family of Chinnayya as his illatom son -in -law. This suit was tried in part with another suit filed by the third defendant, claiming an equal share in the property of Chinnayya with the legitimate son, the first defendant, on the basis of his adoption as an illatom son -in -law ; and a common judgment was delivered.

(2.) THE principal questions tried in the suit were whether the plaintiff was a dasi putra, entitled to a half of the share of a legitimate son, and (2) whether the will, Ex. D -I, was true and valid. The learned Judge upheld the contention of the plaintiff that he was a dasi putra : but held that the will of Chinnayya was binding on the plaintiff and that he could be given nothing more than had been bequeathed to him under the will. In this Court, it is not denied that the plaintiff is the son -by the permanently kept concubine ; and so the only question remaining is whether the will, under which he was left a sum of Rs. 100 only, is binding on him.

(3.) THE appellant's learned advocate argues that the lower Court did not give sufficient attention to the question whether the land which was the subject of the suit was the self -acquired property of Chinnayya or was ancestral property, although that question was raised in the pleadings in the other suit. We have examined the grounds of appeal to this Court and find no allegation that the property was ancestral property that could not be disposed of by will.