v YAVASTHA-DARPANA. 413 q. 3. : should tha eldest son be entitled to inherit Hrom bis portion of the selfacquisitions and of the ancestral property will 'devólvé óñoß mo . . . : • ; : * R. 3. ‘ On the death of the father, all the sons will equally divide their father's property whether iterăsit of self-aequisitionsor patrimony. ă : , ... * w p . . . . . Authorities : The text of Mann. See Reply 2. ' t ... Q. 4. Supposing the eldest son to havélést his father and to have lived apart, and, subsequeatly to stich separation; the father to have lived in a joint state with his other sons, who acquired some property while they were living with their father; in this case, how will such acquisitiqnạbe distributed among the sons . . . . - - R. 4. The eldest brother has no right to the acquisitions of his brethren, provided they were made without the use of the patrimony, even though they were acquired while the sons ware living with their father. - . . . . . . . - Authoritics : - The text of Vyasa, cited in the Dáyatatwa and other law books: “What a man gains by his own ability without relying on the patrimony, he shall not give up to the co-heirs; nor that which is acquired by learning.” . * . ‘. .- " " - ve .ெ 5. - his labour to that of his other sons, acquired some property; in this case, will the eldest son share in the acquisition ?- ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . * . . هے۔ - “.. ... Ba R. 5. Whatever property may be ascertained to have been the father's acquisitions made with the assistace of his other sons, his eldest son is entitled to a share in it, because all the sons have a right to inherit from the father." . . . . * - - Authorities : . • . . . . . The text of Boudhavana, laid down in the Dáyatatwa : “Male issue of the body being left, the property must go to them.” - ." Zillah Nuddea, December 3rd, 1811. Macs H. L. vol. IK Chap. 1. case 5 (pp. 5-7.) Goûruinga Párui v. Řám Prasád Párni - • - : Q. Three uterine brothers lived in a joint and undivided state. The youngest of them obtained a grant of cértain lands in his own name, bát his brothers participated equally with him in , the enjoyment of the produce: . In this gase, should all the brothers be considered joint proprietors of the land, or will the person who obtained the grant possess it exclusively 2 Shotid all the brothers be dead, the two elder leaving no son, but there being a daughter's son of the eldest, is such grandson in the 'female line entitled to receive any share of the property, or’ will the widow of the second brother and son of the person who acquired the grant exclude him; and take the entire state to themselves * . . . . :. . . . • " . • ? 3. Shpuld the youngest brother have acquired the grant in his own name,by means of his own funds and labour exclusively in this case, he ( the youngest brother) is the sole legal proprietor. - *: - +. *** . . 1‘‘ „ If the property have been earned by means of the common funds and labour of all the brethren, though granted in the name of the youngest brother, then the three brothers will be entitled to equal - participation. Should all df them be dead; on failure of sons of the two elder brothers, the grandson in the female line of the eldest brother, and the widow of the second and son of the youngestbrother will participate ii, the estate equally, it having been acquired by means of common funds and labour. This opinion is conformable to thẻ lawas current in Bengal. Zillah Tipperah, June 29th, 1815. Mae. H.Í. vol. II. Chap. I. Case 4 (p. 4). . . * * so to i. Bhoirab chandre Roy versus Rasamani. 18th september 1799. S. D. A. R. vol. 1. p. , 27—See ante, p. 28. - . 3- - Subsequently to the eldest son's departure from the family house, the father, joining. Sons share equally. Property aquir. “ ed by exclusive labour, without , , ubing the patri mony, goes to the acquirer solely. father is on his death inherited equally by all his sons, whother they aided. in the acquisition or not. Cases bearing-on the
- Vyavästhás Nos.
114 &l17,
