AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 117 words
1.
The point of law raised in this Letters Patent Appeal against the decision of Madhavan Nair, J., in Second Appeal No. 144 of 1922, is a
contention that, in a Hindu joint family, the father cannot dispose of his self-acquired property by will. No authority was cited before us for this
contention. It is opposed to Mayne''s exposition of Hindu Law : see paras. 276 and 417 of Mayne''s. Hindu Law, 9th Bin., and to the principles
underlying Alami v. Komu [1883] 12 Mad. 126, and Achutan Nayar v. Cheriotti Nayar [1899] 22 Mad. 9. It is not shown that the learned Judge
has committed any error of law. We therefore dismiss this appeal with costs.