MAZIRANNESSA ALIAS MIZIRANNESSA BIBI Vs. KHONDAKAR GOLAM KIBRIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An interesting point under the Mahometan Law arises for determination in this second appeal. It is as to whether a husband is entitled to inherit from his wife both as husband and as a distant kinsman.

(2.) The properties in dispute belonged to one Makdunnessa who died in Ashar 1357 B. S., and was survived by her husband Bechu. On the death of Makdunnessa, Bechu contracted a second marriage with one Mazinannessa who is the main defendant in this suit. Bechu died thereafter. The plaintiff claims that Bechu inherited 8 annas share of the property of his wife Makdunnessa as a sharer and that the other half she has got as a distant kinsman. The plaintiff claims to be the grand-son of one Hamidun Bibi, the paternal aunt of Makdunnessa and to have inherited and possessed the residuary eight annas share as heir of Makdunnessa in his capacity as a distant kinsman. The suit was contested by Maji-rannessa, and her case is to the effect that Bechu was also the son of the maternal uncle of Makdunnessa, and therefore, he was also a kinsman and a nearer kinsman to Makdunnessa than the plaintiff, and as a distant kinsman, he inherited the residuary eight annas share, and thus became the owner of the 16 annas share in the properties left by Makdunnessa. She further claimed to have got the properties from Bechu by way of an oral gift in lieu of her dower debt.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge accepted the defence case and dismissed the suit. On appeal, the learned Additional District Judge, Hooghly, held that under the Mahomedan Law, Bechu was not entitled to the residuary share which has devolved on the plaintiff and decreed the suit accordingly.