VYA WASTHA.DARPAN A. S{}{} R.]. If the woman state herself to have been authorised by her husband to adopt a hoy, A woman's asser an i the sauction be not proved by the testimony of witnesses or other evidence, the adoption m!" that | Ad % been authorised by her such case is not legal. Authorities.—“Let not a woman either give or receive a son in aduption; unless with the " " " " " prot! a-sent of her husband.” saxhishtha, cited in the lutfaku-chandriká and other authorities. Q. 2. If a dispute arise between an adopted son and his adopting mother, and, to decide it, the adopted son execute an agreement of the following purport, that his mother is to remain in possession of the landed property during her lifetime, and that he is to inherit after hor only on the following coudition, that, should any serious difference occur between his mother and himself, he is to lose all his rights, and his adoption is to be held void; does such document, at the occurence of any difference between them, confer a legal right on the mother to disinherit the adopted son ? R. 2. Under the circumstances stated, such agreement does confer the right alluded to ot the mother, because the owner of any possessions may dispose of them as he pleases. This opinion is conformable to the háymbhúga, Jirá labhangárimra, l irá lárnurasofn, and other tra ts. Authoritics :-The text of Márada cited in the above authorities: “Should they give or sell their own shares, they do all that as they please, for they are masters of their own wealth.” Musst. Taramunee Debia r. Debnaraen Roy and Bishenpersaitl. Sudder Pewanny Adawlut. January t+th, i S24. Maen. H. L. vol. II. Chap. VI. Case 10, pp. 183, 184. Q. A man of the first class while afflicted with leprosy, adopted a son. In this case is the A leper cannot adoption good and valid 7 whost. It. A person afflicted with leprosy is incompetent to adopt a son; for he bears the impurity 'ill death ; consequently the adoption must be considered as void "...— shul. Case 2), p. 201. Q. A person having been afflicted with leprosy, or the like disease, performs the expiation (priyushchillu) ordained in the law for it, and adopts a boy as his son, in this case, in the adoption good and legal or otherwise? li. The person afflicted with leprosy or the like disease, after his performance of the pre- f | t - * | * - + - 钵*臀rí始f he prescribed penance, becomes purified, and is competent to perform pārrana, or double rites ind ព្រំ expiation “remonies, as declared in the seda, therefore the adoption made by the person so purified is good and legalt.—Ibid. Case 21, p. 201. Gauropers/aud Roy Aspel/ant r. Mussummaus Joymälä stopondens. It was set forth in the plaint filed by Muswummnus Joymāsā, in the Zillah ("ourt of Dacea, on the part of her son Shoopershaud, a minor, that her husband had another and it Kenior wife named Parbutee; that he, being childless, had in the year 1199, B, S, given permission to
- It is not distinctly stated in this case whether the leper performed the preseribed expiation. Certain. ly the opinion is correct, provided the leper have not performed expiation; but is performed, the adoption is legal, for the impurity of the leper is removed aster penance performed. Set the following case. - Note hv Sir W. Maenaghten.
- The opinion is correct, but the law officer by whom it was delivered has omitted to support it by any authority. The following passage from the Digest of Jagannātha may serve to supply the omission "Raghunandna holds that expiation for a man afflicted with elephantiasin, or other similar disease, i. ordained for the purpose of enabling him to perform acts of religion ordained in the seda. By parity of reasoning, he becomes competent to inherit property, as well as to perform religious ceremonies.”
