Ramesam, J.

1. Suit to set aside an adoption and to set aside certain alienation by the first defendant, a Hindu widow and heir of the last male owner Brahmanna, who died, according to the evidence (D.W. 1), 50 years ago. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs appeal.

2. The plaintiffs and 4th defendant are the daughters sons of the deceased. The first point raised by the appellant is that the adoption is invalid as the assent of the nearest male heirs, of Brahmanna via., the daughters sons (plaintiffs and 4th defendant) was not sought by the first defendant. In Southern India, in default of husbands authority, a widow may adopt with the consent of her husbands kindred. The question is whether the daughters sons, when they happen to be the nearest heirs, should be consulted. Up to Vadreva Ranganayakammagaru v. Somasundara Rao (1921) 43 Mad. 876, the point has not arisen here and it could not arise elsewhere.

3. The reasons why such a point did not arise till now are obvious. It is very rarely that a grandmother adopts to the detriment of her daughters sons. If she has only one daughters son, she would adopt him in preference to others, or not adopt at all. If