Skip to content


Bai Manekbai Vs. Naranji Dwarkadas - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectFamily
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberO.C.J. Appeal No. 10 of 1909
Judge
Reported in(1910)12BOMLR454
AppellantBai Manekbai
RespondentNaranji Dwarkadas
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
.....court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise held, high court of bombay, is not correct in rejecting arbitration petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. - 388 in which he points out that the inclusion by nilakantha of the paternal grandmother amongst gotraja sapindas involves the conclusion that nilakantha thought that marriage as well as birth created the gotraja relationship and it was argued that if this is so a brother's daughter must be a gotraja sapinda having been born within the gotraja, and upon that basis she is more nearly related to the propositus than the son of the husband's brother also a gotraja sapinda......of a brother.2. the argument for the appellant is professedly based upon the reasoning of mr. justice west in the case of lallubhai v. mankuvarbai ilr (1876) . 2 bom. 388 in which he points out that the inclusion by nilakantha of the paternal grandmother amongst gotraja sapindas involves the conclusion that nilakantha thought that marriage as well as birth created the gotraja relationship and it was argued that if this is so a brother's daughter must be a gotraja sapinda having been born within the gotraja, and upon that basis she is more nearly related to the propositus than the son of the husband's brother also a gotraja sapinda.3. it is, however, to be observed that mr. justice west was of opinion that the blood gotrajaship of married woman cannot safely be extended beyond the.....
Judgment:

Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.

1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Mr. Justice Davar in which he has decided that the son of a father's brother is a nearer heir than the daughter of a brother.

2. The argument for the appellant is professedly based upon the reasoning of Mr. Justice West in the case of Lallubhai v. Mankuvarbai ILR (1876) . 2 Bom. 388 in which he points out that the inclusion by Nilakantha of the paternal grandmother amongst gotraja sapindas involves the conclusion that Nilakantha thought that marriage as well as birth created the gotraja relationship and it was argued that if this is so a brother's daughter must be a gotraja sapinda having been born within the gotraja, and upon that basis she is more nearly related to the propositus than the son of the husband's brother also a gotraja sapinda.

3. It is, however, to be observed that Mr. Justice West was of opinion that the blood gotrajaship of married woman cannot safely be extended beyond the sister, and Sir Michael West-ropp in the same case discussing the position of a sister said :

So far as gotrajaship as understood in this Presidency is an essential qualification for inheritance, she if her marriage preceded her brother's death, would not be qualified to succeed to his estate, inasmuch as after her marriage and consequent transfer to the gotra of her husband, the only relation which existed between her and the family in which she was born was sapinda-ship and not gotraship.

4. Since the decision of that case- the privileges of gotrajaship have never been extended to other married female members of the family born within the gotra, and we are not disposed to extend them now.

5. It is conceded that if the appellant is regarded as merely a sapinda she must be postponed to the respondent who is a gotraja-sapinda.

6. We think that the decision of the learned Judge of the lower Court was right and we dismiss the appeal with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //