PARYANIBAI Vs. BAJIRAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by one Paryanibai widow of Raghoji whose suit for a declaration that respondent Bajirao was not a validly adopted son of her deceased son Baliram has been dismissed in the trial Court, and that dismissal has been affirmed in the lower appellate Court.

(2.) The plaintiff's case was that she had a son by name Baliram who died on 19th January 1950. At the time of his death Baliram left two widows. The senior widow, i.e. the one married earlier to him was Mathurabai and the other was one Dhrupatabai. It is an admitted position that Mathurabai was younger to Dhrupatabai, but the age of these two widows of Baliram is a matter of dispute between the parties. Plaintiff's case was that Baliram died issueless and that he had prohibited any adoption being made after his death-Mathurabai who is the senior widow remarried some time in 1953 and so did the other widow Dhrupatabai. There were proceedings for mutation of the field property after the death of Baliram which were contested proceedings. Those proceedings were decided against the plaintiff, and the plaintiff filed a suit for a declaration that defendant Bajirao who claimed to have been adopted by Mathurabai on 26-6-1950 was not so adopted and, at any rate, the adoption was invalid.

(3.) The ground on which the adoption was challenged as invalid was that the adoptive mother Mathurabai was of an immature age and had not attained the age of discretion. The age which was stated to have been attained was hardly 12 or 121/2 years at the time of the alleged adoption. On this ground the plaintiff claimed to be the reversionary heir of her deceased son Baliram after having the adoption declared invalid.