RAMABAI Vs. HARNABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case for the appellant has been stated with admirable clearness and brevity by his counsel, but their Lordships do not think it necessary to call for any argument for the respondents.

(2.) This is an appeal from a decree of December 5, 1918, of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which affirmed a decree dated November 1, 1916, of the Court of the Additional First Class Subordinate Judge at Poona.

(3.) The only question submitted to the Board, and now subsisting, is as to the condition of body, and possibly of mind, of one Narayan Mawal. The appellant maintains that Narayan Mawal was so afflicted with leprosy as to deprive him of the position of being joint owner of certain family property, and, secondly, to deprive him of the ability to make a valid adoption of a son. His natural son had died, and the adoption was made a few weeks before his death. Had Narayan not been a leper, this natural and proper act could not have been challenged.