History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t1.158
History of Dharmaśāstra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t1.158
- Language
- English
v4.c63.t1.158
As regards the power of a widow to adopt in the Bombay school, when her husband was joint at the time of his death, the case law has fluctuated from time to time. Only a few cases may be referred to here. In *Ramji v. Ghamau* 6 Bom. 498 (F. B.) a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court held that a widow, whose husband was a member of a joint family at the time of his death, could not adopt when she has not the authority of her husband or the consent of the husband's undivided coparceners. After this decision had stood for 50 years the Privy Council held in *Bhimabai v. Gurunathgouda*¹²⁶⁵ L. R. 60 I. A. p. 25 that the Full Bench decision had already been overruled in *Yadao v. Namdeo* (48 I. A. 513) and that a Hindu widow can adopt without the consent of her husband's co-parceners, when the husband was a member of a joint family at the time of his death. This decision was carried further by Amarendra's case (60 I. A. 242) by holding that when a widow, who had authority to adopt, adopted even after the estate had devolved on a male collateral heir such adopted son would take the estate and deprive the heir of it. As any widow was held to be able to adopt in Bombay without anybody's consent, hundreds of adoptions have taken place, which came and are coming before the courts. Another Full Bench case held that when a Hindu coparcenary came to an end on the death of the last surviving coparcener and the family property became vested in his heir, a subsequent adoption by the widow of a predeceased coparcener was valid, but it did not revive the coparcenary nor did it vest the property of the former coparcenary in the adopted son (*Balu v. Lahoo* I. L. R. 1937 Bom. 508). When a co-parcenary was broken up by partition among the members, it was held¹²⁶⁶ that the widow of a coparcener who died long before the partition cannot make a valid adoption and reliance was placed on a passage of the Viramitrodaya (quoted below).¹²⁶⁷