LAWS(PVC)-1921-8-114

MA YAIT Vs. MAUNG CHIT MAUNG

Decided On August 01, 1921
MA YAIT Appellant
V/S
Maung Chit Maung Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are consolidated appeals from the judgments of the Chief Court of Lower Burma, which varied judgments of that Court on its original side. The real question to be determined is, whether one Maung Ohn Ghine, who died on the 10th June 1911, and who was an opulent and prominent merchant in Rangoon, was a Hindu within the meaning of Section 13 of the Burma Laws Act, 1898. If he was, it is not in controversy that Hindu Law so governed the succession to his estates, that a voluntary settlement made by him of the 5th May 1908 could not be folly operative, Section 13 of the Act referred to is in these terms:

(2.) THE consolidated appeals arise out of two suits. In one of these a declaration was sought that the settlement referred to was wholly inoperative, and, alternatively, for a declaration that the dispositions in favour of persons unborn at the date of the settlement were void. The other suit was for administration of the estate under the direction of the Court. The Judge of first instance held that Maung Ohn Ghine was not a Hindu or a Buddhist within the meaning of the Act, and it was cot suggested that he was a Muham-madan. He, therefore, held that the law which applied was that provided by the Indian Succession Act of 1865, according to which, excepting in the case of succession to some one belonging to one of these three classes, there are laid down provisions equivalent to rules of justice, equity and good conscience, whiah permitted the validity of the settlement of the 5th May, 1908 Under this, Maung Ohn Ghine conveyed property, reserving his life interest in it, to trustees for his wife and children and their issue, some of whom might be unborn, as in the deed provided. If the learned Judge was right in thinking that the settler did not come within any one of the three specified classes, it is not disputed that this further conclusion Was correct.

(3.) IN order to decide which of the views of his status was right;, it is necessary to turn to the story of Maung Ohn Ghine's life. He was a merchant in Rangoon who died during a visit to England. Among other positions, he held that of a Municipal Commissioner and Magistrate in Rangoon. It is clear that he was a Kalai, which means that he was the defendant of a Hindu who had married a Burmese woman, His parents also were Kalais, and he himself married a Kalait His paternal grandfather was apparently apparently Hindu who had migrated from Madras to Burma and had married a Burmese. His son was, therefore, a Kalai, and the latter married a Kalai. Maung Ohn Ghine was, therefore, a Kalai, and he lived in Burma all his life, excepting when absent on short visits. Twomey, J., when delivering his judgment in the Court of appeal, gave a description of Maung Ohn Ghine's career, which is instructive: in matters of daily life, apart from his religion, Ohn Gine was hardly distinguishable from the Burmese community in general, and it appears that he was as a prominent member of the Burmese community that he was sent to England at the time of King Ed ward's Coronation. Great stress has been laid on the leading part taken by Ohn Gnine in supporting various important Baddhist interests. In 1900 he wrote to the Governor of Madras urging that certain Buddhist relics lying in the Madras Museum should be made over to him to be placed in a shrine which he was preparing at Rangoor, and he referred in this letter to his Buddhist coreligionists. In a letter, dated the 18th February HOI, to the Colonial Secretary, Ceylon, he joined with several others in adv(sic)ing the cause of the Burmese Baddhist pilgums to the Buddhist temple of the Sacred Tooth Relic at Kandy, and the writers of this letter describe themselves as 'Burmese pilgrims now on a visit to Ceylon.' As one of the community of the Buddha Gaya Missionary Society he also championed the cause of the Burmese Buddhists against the Mohunt of a Hindu temple at Gaya with reference to a certain Zayat erected there by King Mindon for the use of the Burmese pilgrims, He was, one of the residents of Rangoon who presented an address on behalf of the Baddhist Community to thee Votary, Lord catzon, on his visit to Rangoon in 1901.