Ganpat vs Dalib and Others

Oldfield and Tyreell, JJ.—This appeal raises a question as to the rights of inheritance of illegitimate sons of Sudras, the parties in this case being Ahir. The plaintiff claims to succeed to a share of the property left by Shahzadeh, on the ground that he is his son by a woman named Musammat Salomi. It has been found as facts by both Courts that Salomi was the wife of Shahza-deh''s paternal uncle, and on the death of her husband she entered into a karao marriage with one Sukhain, and that the plaintiff was the offspring of an adulterous intercourse between her and Shahzadeh after her marriage with Sukhain. Accepting these facts, with the findings on which we cannot in second appeal interfere, we are of opinion that the plaintiff has no right to inherit Shahzadeh''s property. He is the offspring of adulterous and consequently illegal intercourse, and incapable of inheriting even as a Sudra.

There are numerous decisions by the Courts to this effect - Vencatachella Chetty v. Parvathammal 8 Mad. 134; Parisi Nayudu v. Bangaru Nnyudu 4 Mad. 204 Viraramuthi Udayan v. Singaravelu ILR Mad. 306; Rahi v. Govinda ILR Bom. 97 and Narayan Bharthi v. Laving Bharthi ILR Bom. 140

The appeal is decreed, and the decrees of the Courts below are set aside, and the suit dismissed with all costs.