VYAVASTHA’-DARPANA 53 Patni as used in the singular by the Rishis and commentators, is applied collectively to all of one class, thercofore, 17. If there be two or more wives, they have equal title to inherit the estate of their late husband :" since they being of the same tribe are all Patmás. The author of Vivádabhangármara says: “If a man die leaving two wives equal in class, the eldest alone has a right to his cstate ; for on the concurrent texts of DAkshy A and Visit NU, (viz. “The first wife is espoused from a sense of duty ; the scCond czcites sensual desire : union with her being productive of things of sense only, not spiritual things. If many wives of his own class be living, with the cliest alone should the husband perform religious rites,) and by the text which declares ‘the clácst wife is the patní ;’ the term patni indicatcs Dharma-patni, the other wives are to get maintenance only.” And this be affirms to be the opinion of Jimi rava 11ANA. This is not correct; for Jimitav AirANA has only declared that, among the wives of different classes or tribes, she who is of the same tribe is the patní, as she is the eldest of all ; but has not laid down that where there are many of the same tribc, the clicst exclusively is the patni. It is true Visii Nu has said : “if many wives of the same class be living, with the eldest alone should the husband conduct business relating to acts of religion.” This however cannot be taken to destroy the heritable rights of the other wives of the same class ; since by performance of religious rites in conjunction with the husband a wife becomes Dharmapatnis, but this docs by no means entitle her to inherit to the exclusion of other wives, nor by her acquiring that grade or rank the rights of the wives who are also patnís at all affected. The title of each and all of thcm is based on the performance after thcir husband's death of acts or rites beneficial to his soul , and therefore is sit, that all widowed Patna's who persevere in religious observances equally inherit their husband's cstate. - 18. Upon the death of any of several widows of a deceased proprietor, the portion inherited by her devolves on the surviving widow or widows ; since no portion can go to the other heirs of the husband, so long as his widow survivest. Rām Sundra Adhikári left two widows and no children. This action was by one of the widows to recover possession of an undivided moiety of the houses and land of her husband : it was undefended. She proved a prima sacic title in Râm Sundra Adhikāri to part of the premises in the plaint, viz. four higha's and some kāthas at Sutānuti in Calcutta (ancestral property); for an undivided moiety of which the Court gave judgment for lessor of the plaintiff. Bhogahati Rär versus Rádhá Krishna Mukhopādhyāy (Mookerjea,) Montriou's Cases of Hindu Law, p. 314. A Hindu died without issue, leaving two widows, who took his whole estate for life. On the death of one, the other claimed the whole. Held that the survivor, would take, by law, every thing that was not bequeathed to another (and upon her death it goes to the collateral relations of the husband.) Srimatí Brajeshwarí Dásí ersus Rám-mani Datta andothers. 20th July 1816. East’s Notes, Casc 51.
- See Macn. H. L. vol. 1. Sec 2, p. 19. t Sce Macn. H. L. vol. I. Preliminary Remarks, pp. 12, 18; & Sect. 2, pp. 20, 21.
N Vyavasthá. Reason. Vyawasthù. lReason. Case bearing on the vyavasthā No. 17. Case bearing on the vya vasthā No. 18.
