MANCHHARAM BHIKU PATIL Vs. DATTU BHIKU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs in this case claimed to be the illegitimate sons of one Bhiku and sued to recover by partition their 3/5th share in the moveable and immoveable properties left by Bhiku. The defendant No. 1 is the legitimate son of Bhiku, defendant No. 2 is his grand-son, and defendant No. 3 Bhimabai, who died during the pendency of the appeal in this Court, was the widow of Bhiku. Bhiku died in July 1912.

(2.) The defence raised was that the parties belonged to the Lewa Patidar caste, and occupied the same status as the Lewa Patidars in Gujarat and that as such they were either Kshatriyas or Vaishyas, but not Sudras, for the purposes of inheritance. The other defence raised was that the mother was entitled to a separate share at the partition.

(3.) The First Class Subordinate Judge of Dhulia came to the conclusion that the parties were Sudras, and that according to the Hindu law the illegitimate sons were entitled to half the share of the legitimate son. He also came to the conclusion that the mother was not entitled to a share; and on the footing of these findings he passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs for the equitable partition of the property awarding them 3/5th share as claimed by them.