High CourtsDivision Bench

Nagalingam Pillai vs Vaduganatha Asari and Another

Madras High Court · Decided on 21 January 1918 · Citation: 45 Ind. Cas. 672

HON’BLE JUDGES
Phillips, J · Bakewell, J
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 125 words
1.

It has been held in Kamakshi v. Nagarathnam 5 M.H.C.R. 161 that in the dancing girl caste daughters succeed in preference to sons, and Strange in his Manual of Hindu Law says that the property of a dancing girl will pass to her female issue first and then to her male issue as in the case of other females. Although the property is not Stridhanam, its devolution is by custom similar to the devolution of Stridhanam. Consequently a daughter''s daughter must be preferred to a son, just as in ordinary Hindu Law a son''s son is preferred to a daughter, as in the latter sons have the preference over daughters. The District Judge is, therefore, right and this second appeal is dismissed with costs.