JUDGMENT

Harrison, J. - Plaintiff in this case, who is the collateral in the third degree of one Piara, a childless proprietor, who died in 1918, brings this suit against his sister's son in whose name mutation has been effected, and contends that by custom he has a better right to succeed. The suit has been dismissed by both the lower Courts, and he now comes up on second appeal with a certificate; and the only point to be decided is whether, amongst Lak Jats of the Mazaffargarh District, collaterals in the third degree exclude sister's sons.

2. The plaintiff relies on one published decision of this Court, a decision, of the District Judge of Muzaffargarh and one of the Munsif of Muzaffargarh. These refer to particular cases in which it was decided that, among Minwal Jats, Gorab Jats and Gurab Jats, collaterals exclude sisters. He also relies on the reply to question No. 10 in the Riwaj-i-am which shows that in some cases sisters have been excluded and in other cases collaterals have been excluded by them.

3. As against this evidence there is the customary Law of the Muzaffargarh District, question No. 21, in which it is clearly laid down that sisters or their descendants succeed in preference to the grandfather or his descendants. In two reported decisions of the Chief Court, Alam v. Nur (1905) 62 P.R. 1905 and Sawan v. Sahib Khatun (1909) 44 P.R. 449, which related to Mithu Jats and Panwar Jats of the Muzaffargarh District, it was held that sisters succeed as against collaterals. Similarly, in Exhibit D-l sisters and their sons have been preferred and in Ex. D-ll, a judgment of Wilberforce, J., (No. 151 of 1912) it was held that among Mouda Jats sisters excluded collaterals in the third degree. The position of the females generally, as has been clearly established in many rulings, is very much stronger in the western Punjab than elsewhere.

4. I find that it is fully established by the evidence on the record that a sister or sister's son excludes collaterals in the third degree among Lak Jats of the Muzaffargarh District, I, therefore, dismiss the appeal with costs.