SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

SILINDUHAMY et al. v. MOHOTTIHAMY et al.


Silinduhamy Et Al. V. Mohottihamy Et Al.,

Present: Hutchinson C.J. and Middleton J.   Feb.24,1911

SILINDUHAMY et al. v. MOHOTTIHAMY et al.

8-C. R. Ratnapura, 11,323.

Kandyan Law- Children by three beds-Succession among half-brothers and sisters-Per stirpes and not per capita.

A, a Kandyan, who was thrice married, died intestate, leaving him surviving one child S by his first wife, one child D by his second wife, and four children (plaintiffs) by his third wife. S died leaving two children (defendants). D, who inherited one-third share of A's estate, died intestate and childless.

Held, that the four plaintiffs were entitled to one-half and the two defendants to the other half of D's property.

THE facts are fully set out in the judgment of Hutchinson C.J. The case was referred to a Bench of two Judges by Van Langenberg A.J.

R. H. Morgan (with him Zoysa), for the plaintiffs, appellants, referred to the following authorities: Sawyer's Digest, pp. 9, 10; Perera's Collection, p. 124; Siriya v. Kaluwa;1 [(1899) 9 S. C. C. 45.] 2 Lorensz 27

No appearance for respondents.

Cur. adv. vult.

February 24, 1911. Hutchinson C.J.-

This case was referred to a Court of two Judg

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top