History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v4.c63.t1.162.5

v4.c63.t1.162.5

Supposing that the last surviving member of a family dies leaving a married daughter and a predeceased son's widow and the daughter inherits an absolute estate (as she does in Bombay) and remains in possession for 30 years, is it meant that a son thereafter adopted by the widowed daughter-in-law can divest an estate vested for thirty years in a married daughter who is not a member of the family at all after her marriage? The recent P. C. decision in *Anant v. Shankar* appears to indicate that whatever the length of time the adopted son will oust a collateral to whom the estate may have gone by inheritance. Intending purchasers have become afraid that there is no knowing how far the P. C. may go. These decisions will lead on to hurried sales of joint family property at whatever price may be fetched immediately a coparcener dies leaving a widow. The result of the several decisions of the P. C. has been that properties of Hindu families in which widows of predeceased coparceners exist are not easily saleable and do not yield their proper market value. The inroads on the ancient joint family system of the Mitākṣarā have been so many that only the shell remains; the burdens are there, but the soul is gone, what with the right of each coparcener to alienate his share for consideration, the Gains of learning Act, Act 18 of 1937, the decisions of the P. C. about adoption, sec. 39 of the Transfer of Property Act.