Phillips, J.

1. The sole question for determination in this appeal is whether plaintiff or 3rd defendant is the heir to the property of one Gomati Ammal, a maiden. Plaintiff is the fathers brothers son of Gomatis father, whereas 3rd defendant is the sister of Gomatis father. In Kamala v. Bhagirathi (1912) I.L.R. 38 Mad. 46 : 23 M.L.J. 618 it was held that when a maidens mother and father are dead her heirs are her fathers Sapindas and this case followed Janglu Bai v. Jethn Appaji (1908) I.L.R 32 Bom. 409 Tukaram v. Narayan Ramachandra (1911) I.L.R. 86 Bom 339 and Dwarka Nath Roy v. Sarat Chandra Singh Roy (1911) I.L.R. 39 Cal. 319. In Mitakshara Chapter II, Section 11 P1. 20 there is a text of Baudhayana which says. "The wealth of a deceased damsel let the uterine brethren themselves take. On failure of them it shall belong to the mother, or, if she be dead, to the father," but the Mitakshara is silent as to the succession in default of mother or father, In the abovementioried cases the rule of succession to the property of a woman married in an unapproved form contained in Pl. 11 of the same section was applied by analogy and it would appear that this decision, of three Hig