CHAMANLAL CHAKUBHAI Vs. BAI PARVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this appeal is what rule governs (under the Mayukha) the power of disposition over moveable property acquired by a Hindu widow in partition with her sons. The arguments before me had reference mainly to the decision in Debi Mangal Prasad Singh V/s. Mahadeo Prasad Singh (1912) L.R. 39 I.A. 121

(2.) Their Lordships were also concerned with property received by a widow in partition. They had to consider what rule should be adopted in regard to the line of descent with respect to immoveable property : not, as I have to do, what rule should be applied in regard to the power of disposal in respect of moveable property. The question before me differs in two respects. I have to consider the rule applicable to powers of disposal, not the rule of inheritance; and I am concerned with move-able, not with immoveable property.

(3.) There is no rule in the texts directly applicable to the inheritance of immoveable property acquired by a widow in partition. For, although the Mitakshara contains a rule of inheritance in general terms applicable to all property howsoever acquired by a woman, yet most of the old commentators recognise with regard to the property of a woman that there may be room for differences in its line of descent according to the mode of its acquisition : Chotay Lal v. Chunno Lal (1878) L.R. 6 I.A. 15, 30 and Sheo Shankar Lal V/s. Debi Sahai (1903) L.R. 30 I.A. 202