1916 Present: Ennis J. and De Sampayo J.

UKKUWA v. BANDUWA.

16-D. C. Kurunegala, 5,396.

Kandyan law-Acquired property-Inheritance-Donation by father to son-Son dying issueless, leaving mother and step-brothers.

S, a Kandyan, gifted a land to his son P. P. died issueless, leaving him surviving his mother, D, and step-brothers (children of S by another wife).

Held, that the property devolved on D on the death of P, to the exclusion of his (P's) step-brothers.

Property gifted to a person is acquired property of that person.

THE facts are fully set out in the judgment.

Bawa, K.C., for appellants.

G. Koch (with him P. M. Jayawardene), for respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

March 3, 1916. ENNIS J.

The question in this appeal is one of the Kandyan law of inheritance. In 1906 one Sedara gifted an undivided half share of certain lands to his son Pina. Pina died intestate, leaving surviving him his mother, Dingiri. Dingiri gifted the land to Kiriya, who sold it to the plaintiff. The defendants are the step-brothers of Pina, children of Sedara by another wife. Two points arose in the case: first, whether the property was " acquired " or paraveni property; and second, whether Dingiri inherited the land on the death of Pina, or had only a life interest. It was conceded on the authority of Dingiri Banda v. Medduma Banda1 that the property was " acquired " property. On the second point it was urged that Bungappu v. Obias Appuhamy2 was an authority. The same question arose in the case of Ukkuhamy v. Bala Etana,3 in which it was pointed out that in Bungappu v. Obias Appuhamy2 it was not denied that the intestate's acquired lands passed to his brothers and sisters. It would seem that the point now at issue was not decided in that case, which is therefore not an authority for the proposition. In Vkkuhamy v. Bala Etana3 Wendt J. dealt exhaustively with the question, and decided that an intestate's acquired immovable property devolved on the mother (the father being dead). I am in entire accord with that decision, and would accordingly dismiss the appeal, with costs.

1 (1914) 17 N. L. R. 201.                                2 (1901) 2 Br. 286.
                                   3 (1908) 11 N. L. R. 226.

 DE SAMPAYO J.-

 This appeal raises for determination a point in the Kandyan law of inheritance. One Sedara, who was married to Dingiri, was the owner of certain lands. He gifted one of the lands to his son Pina by two deeds in 1900 and 1906, respectively. Pina died intestate, unmarried, and issueless, leaving his mother Dingiri. Sedara appears to have predeceased Pina. The plaintiffs have purchased the lands from a donee of Dingiri, and the defendants, who are children of Sedara by a former wife, claim the same as heirs of their half-brother Pina. The chief authority relied on by Mr. Bawa for the defendants is a passage in Sawer's Digest, at page 13, where it is stated: " A person dying childless, having parents and brothers and sisters, the property which the deceased may have had from his other parents reverts to them reciprocally (if from the father to the father, if from the mother to the mother), as does his acquired property, whether land, cattle, or goods, to his parents, but his parents have only the usufruct of the acquired property. " The expression " from his other parents " is rather curious. Probably it is intended to refer to cases of associated marriages. With regard to property inherited from the parents, the rule laid down in the above passage is universally accepted; but so far as acquired property is concerned, it is inconsistent with Sawer's page 17, and with Armour on the same subject. After full consideration of all the authorities, including Sawer's page 13, it has been decided in Ukkuhamy v. Bala Etana1[(1908) 11 N. L. R. 226.] that where a Kandyan dies unmarried, and childless, and intestate, his acquired property, in default of his father, devolve