Vada in Theory and Practice: Studies in Debates, Dialogues and Discussions in Indian Intellectual Discourses c11.s2.9

c11.s2.9

The *paṇḍits* also served as Hindu law officers to interpret the rules. Bharat Bhatta, one such officer in the case of Bhola Dhami vs. Nawaju, consulted and cited the prescriptions from *Vīramitrodaya*. There have been debates over the right of widows to inherit the property of their husband, and also over their right to adopt a child. Bhola Dhami was the adopted son of Nawaju, the widow of Krishna Chandra Dhami in 1780. After a few years, there were disputes between her and the adopted son. She disinherited him and went for a second adoption. Bhola Dhami sued her. The case was taken up in 1800 in Gaya court. On the basis of his consultations with local officers, the judge dismissed Bhola Dhami’s claim and upheld the second adoption by Nawaju. But the dispute continued for over twenty years. On the basis of commentaries on *Vīramitrodaya*, Līlādhara who was engaged as law officer this time from Gayā gave the *vyavasthā* (opinion) that the husband’s consent is inferred automatically.²⁰