Maintenance not of right under the general law but may be under custom.

These appeals under section 51 of Act XXVI of 1948 are directed against the orders of the Estates Abolition Tribunal, Madurai, in O.P. Nos. 167 1951 and 170 of 1951, rejecting the claim of the respective appellants for a share in the compensation amount. Sivagiri in the Tirunelveli District was an ancient impartible estate ; and it was also included in the Schedule to the Madras Impartible Estates Act (II of 1904). On the passing of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act (XXVI of 1948), which hereafter shall be referred to as the Act, the Sivagiri Estate was taken over by the Government as and from 3rd January, 1951, the date of the notification. An advance compensation of Rs. 2,40,000 was deposited by the Government with the Chairman of the Estates Abolition Tribunal.

Senthattikalai Pandian Chinnathambiar, the previous Zamindar of Sivagiri Estate, died in 1934, leaving his surviving 7 sons, born of lawful wedlock and one Chinnadurai alias Ramachandran, the appellant in S.T.A. No. 138 of 1954, who was born of his continuously kept concubine. On the death of the Zamindar, the eldest of the legitimate sons, Varaguna Pandian, suceeded to the Zamindan. The management of the estate was, however, handed over by him in 1941 to the Court of Wards under section 18 of the Madras Court of Wards Act. Varaguna Pandian married two wives, and had a concubine as well. He had four sons through his two wives, and two illegitimate sons, Chelladurai and Swamidurai through his concubine. They are the appellants in S.T.A. No. 132 of 1954. It must be noticed that, on the date of the notification under Act XXVI of 1948, Varaguna Pandian was the landholder, though the management of the Sivagiri Estate was in the hands of the Court of Wards.

In O.P. No. 170 of 1951, the six brothers of the Zamindar, Varaguna Pandian, joining with their illegitimate half-brother, Chinnadurai (viz., the legitimate and illegitimate sons of the previous zamindar) claimed that they were entitled to a share in the compensation amount under section 45 (6) of the Act, or alternatively, to an aliquot share of the 1/5A of the compensation amount under section 45 (4) and (5). During the pendency of the petition, an arrangement was entered into between the Court of Wards and the six brothers of the Zamindar. The petition, therefore, proceeded before the Tribunal only with regard to the claim of the illegitimate son of the previous Zamindar. His claim was contested by the Court of Wards. The Court of Wards denied that he was illegitimate son of the previous Zamindar ; it was also contended that, even if he were the illegitimate son of the previous Zamindar, he would not be entitled to any maintenance out of the impartible estate of Sivagiri, and consequently to any portion of the compensation amount.

The Tribunal found that Chinnadurai was the dasi putra or illegitimate son of the previous Zamindar, born to him by his continuously kept concubine. On the other question, the Tribunal held that, as there was no proof of any special custom obtaining in the family, whereby the illegitimate son of the Zamindar was entitled to be paid maintenance out of the income from the impartible estate, Chinnadurai’s claim had to fail. In that view, the Tribunal rejected the application of the illegitimate half-brother of the Zamindar to a share in the amount, set apart for payment to the maintenance holders under section 45. Chinnadurai has filed S.T.A. No 138 of 1954 against the order of the Tribunal.

O.P. No. 167 of 1951 was filed by Chelladurai and Swami Durai, claiming as the illegitimate sons of Varaguna Pandian, who was the Zamindar at the time of taking over the estate by the Government. They put forth claims similar to Chinnadurai. Their status as illegitimate sons of the Zamindar was, however, not denied. But their right to participate in the compensation amount was denied. The Tribunal held that, under the law, the illegitimate sons of the Zamindar would not