JUDGMENT

Mackney, J - The plaintiff-respondent, Ma Pwa Chit, claimed to have been the wife of the late U Shwe Hpi, who died some ten years ago. The defendant-appellant, Ma Baw, was admittedly the chief wife of the said U Shwe Hpi. Ma Pwa Chit claimed a half share of U Shwe Hpi's estate. Ma Baw opposed the claim on the ground that Ma Pwa Obit was a mere concubine. However during the hearing of the suit she did not seek to establish this point. The evidence brought by her tends to show that Ma Pwa Chit was an "inferior wife" who took no part in the joint enterprise of U Shwe Hpi and Ma Baw as a Burmese Buddhist married couple and who was only occasionally visited by U Shwe Hpi. The learned District Judge held that Ma Pwa Chit had been publicly recognized as the wife of D Shwe Hpi; that Ma Baw her-self had accepted Ma Pwa Chit as a "lesser wife," and that U Shwe Hpi appeared to have lived as much with one as with the other although he went to work from Ma Baw's house and transacted business jointly with her and not with Ma Pwa Chit. The learned Judge referred to Maung Tha Dun v. Ma Thein Yin QA.I.R. 1924 Rang. 37 and Ma Thein Yin v. Maung Tha Dun A.I.R. 1924 Rang. 105 as well as Ma U Byu v. Ma Hnyin (1897) 2 U.B.R. 160 and concluded that as U Shwe Hpi had lived indifferently with both Ma Baw and Ma Pwa Chit, and as neither of them could really be considered as having lived separately from him, the status of both seemed to be precisely the same, although one may have been the first or chief wife. The learned Judge did not think that the fact that Ma Pwa Chit had not assisted U Shwe Hpi in his business should of itself deprive her of the status of wife. Accordingly he held that she was entitled to a half share in the estate. Against this decision Ma Baw has appealed on the ground that Ma Pwa Chit was at most an inferior wife living separately from U Shwe Hpi and receiving only his occasional visits and she therefore was not endowed with any proprietary or personal rights to inherit U Shwe Hpi's estate.

2. In Ma Than v. Ma Kyin A.I.R. 1926 Rang. 111, it was held that the decisions of this Court in the case of Maung Tha Dun v. Ma Thein Yin A.I.R. 1924 Rang. 37 and Ma Thein Yin v. Maung Tha Dun A.I.R. 1924 Rang. 105, should be regarded as settled law. The principles laid down in the case of Ma Thein Yin v. Maung Tha Dun A.I.R. 1924 Rang. 105 are that:

In Buddhist law, a man might marry two or more women at the same time who might all have the status of a wife. Such wives, whether they live together with the husband or not, inherit his estate on an equal footing.

3. Further:

The Buddhist law also contemplates the existence of other women of humbler standing who are differentiated from wives proper or 'superior wives' who inherit on an equal footing, by being described' as 'inferior' or 'lesser wives'. Such an 'inferior' or 'lesser wife,' if living together with the husband, is entitled to two-fifths and the 'superior wife' to three-fifths of the husband's estate; but where such inferior wife is living apart from the husband and is only occasionally visited by him, she is entitled to nothing more than the property which had passed to her possession during the lifetime of the husband.

4. In 1 Rangoon at p. 4 it is said:

...a husband may enter into and maintain conjugal relations with a parson whose position falls short of that of his first or chief wife...the second wife must, before she can succeed to her husband's estate, show that her connexion with the deceased was such that she may be said to have been endowed with proprietary, as well as personal, rights....

5. It seems that U Shwe Hpi married Ma Baw about 35 years ago and had seven children by her. Somewhere in 1918 he became attracted to Ma Pwa Chit, who had already been twice married, and eloped with her. It is said that after living in a friend's house for some days he brought her back to his own house where Ma Baw was living and kept her there for a month. Ma Baw denies this, but I do