Wilson and Tottenham, JJ.
1. The only question argued before us is this, whether property acquired in the name of a Hindu lady, a member of a joint family, is presumably joint family property or not. The property in this case is found standing in the names of two ladies, members of a joint Hindu family and widows of deceased members of that family. An express decision on the point given in 1871 is that of Chunder Nath Moitro v. Kristo Komul Singh 15 W.R. 357. The judgment was delivered by one of the greatest masters of Hindu law who has ever administered justice in this country. And we are not aware that that view has ever been questioned until now. It is said that a recent decision of a Division Bench of this Court is in conflict with this ruling. But it does not appear to us to be so. The case referred to is Chowdrain v. Tarini Kant Lahiri Chowdhry 11 C.L.R. 41 : 8 Cal. 545.
2. There the question considered was whether as between a husband or a purchaser at a sale in execution against the husband and the wife, there is any presumption that property standing in the name of the wife is held by her benami for her husband. That is an entirely different question from that raised in this case, whether a wife, a member of a joint family, is, as regards property held in her name, in the same position as her husband with respect to property acquired in his name, and subject to the same presumption in favour of the joint family.
3. The appeal is dismissed with costs.