Syed Abdul Hameed Sahib and Another vs Syed Unnissa Bibi and Others

Madhavan Nair, J.—The plaintiff-appellant set up a case of inheritance by lineal primogeniture. This he has not been able to prove. He not haying proved his title, consideration as to whether the defendant, a woman, is competent to hold the office does not arise. Even if it does arise I should hold on the authority of the decision of this Court in Munnavaru Begam Sahibu v. Mir Mahapall Sahib 1919 Mad. 202 that she is fit to hold the office as it has not been shown that she is disqualified on account of some special reason. It is said that in Second Appeal No. 51 of 1886 a woman was held disqualified from holding the office of Asarai Sheriff as the duties of the office are merely spiritual. But the High Court simply accepted the finding of the lower Court and the decision in my view cannot be taken as laying down the proposition that the office of Asarai Sheriff cannot be held by a woman on the ground that the duties of the office are spiritual. As a matter of fact in this case it is admitted that one of yeomiahdhars is a woman. This will show that it will not be safe to say generally as a rule that women cannot hold the office of Asarai Sheriff. The evidence in the present case is that the duties of the office are such as can be performed by women. Accepting the findings, I dismiss the second appeal with costs.