1. Upon the facts found the decision is clearly right. The property in dispute was admittedly the Stridhanam of Venkamma deceased. In 1877 she married the plaintiff's son in the Brahma form. The property was given to her partly by her own family and partly by her husband's family on the 2nd day of the marriage. The marriage being of the approved form it is clear that plaintiff who is her son's sapinda is entitled to take the property. It is laid down in Mitakshara Chap. 2, Section 11, that the Stridhanam property of a woman married in the approved form goes on her death to her husband and if he is dead to his nearest kinsmen.
2. For appellant it is contended that Venkamma's husband's father who is said to be alive is a preferable heir to plaintiff on the ground that as a general rule males excluded females unless the succession of the latter is provided for by special texts. We are not however prepared to accept this contention. The class of heirs indicated by the text mentioned above is that of sapindas and the sapinda relationship has no reference to the nature of the property. The mother is admittedly a nearer sapinda to her son than the father, when the question is one of succession to the son's property. In the absence of a special rule as to the order in which sapindas of the husband succeed to the wife's Stridhanam as between themselves, the general rule that the mother is a nearer sapinda of her son than the father makes her the preferable heir to the Stridhanam property left by her daughter-in-law.
3. The appeal therefore fails and is dismissed with costs.