Musammat Nihali vs Kanak Singh - 1914 Supreme(All) 238

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1914 Supreme(All) 238

CHAMIER
Musammat Nihali – Appellant
Versus
Kanak Singh – Respondent

JUDGMENT

Chamier, J. - The only question in this appeal is whether the marriage of a Jat widow named Amin Koer divested her of her interest in the property of her first husband. If this question is answered in the negative this appeal must be dismissed.

2. It is common ground that Amin Koer was entitled to contract a second marriage. According to the decision of Mula v. Pariah 6 Ind. Cas. 116 : 32 A. 489 : 7 A.L.J. 417 where the rules of her caste allow a Hindu widow to re-marry, the second marriage does not under-the Hindu Law 'divest her of the property of her first husband.

3. But a custom to the contrary may, of course, be proved and the defendants essayed to prove such a custom in this case. Both Courts below have held that the custom has not been proved. In second appeal one of the defendants contends that the decisions of the Courts below are erroneous and they rely on the decision in Ram Kishan v. Medh Singh 1 Ind. Cas. 141. That case related to a village the Wajib-ul-arz of which laid down that a widow was entitled to her husband's property provided that she did not marry again. On that and other evidence the Court held that the custom now in question had been proved. It is n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document