Dinohamy Et Al. V. Balahamy Et. Al.,

 [ PRIVY COUNCIL.]

1927 Present: Viscount Haldane, Lord Shaw, and Lord Warrington
of Clyffe.

DISOHAMY el al. v. BALAHAMY et al.

Husband and wife-Presumption of marriage-Habit and repute- Agreement by widow relinquishing her rights-Validity.

Under tin- law, of Ceylon where a man and woman are proved to have lived together as husband and wife the law will presume unless the contrary be clearly proved, that they were living together in consequence of a valid marriage, and not in a state of concubinage.

Sastry velaider Aronegary  v. Sembecutty Vaigalic 1[6 A. C. 364.] followed.

Where, on the death of a person, a child of the deceased by the first bed obtained a deed of agreement from the widow, which altered her status and extinguished her rights, and where it was not proved that she had fully understood the contents of the deed.-

Held, that the deed of agreement was no bar to her and her children's rights under the law of intestate succession.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Supreme Court. The facts artfully stated in the judgment of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

June 16, 1927. Delivered by LORD SHAW.-

This is an appeal raising the question of the validity of a Sinhalese marriage. A petition was presented by the respondents in the District Court of Tangalla in Ceylon for letters of administration of the estate of one, who for short may be called Don Andris de Silva. Don Andris died on September 1, 1921. The application was made upon December 14 of that year by Singho Appu, the son-in-law of the deceased Don Andris. Don Andris died intestate.

The family history of Don Andris was that he had been regularly married in 1885, having as issue the daughter who, through her husband Singho Appu, now claims his whole estate. This first wife died in May, 1900.

Then in 1901, and for a course of twenty years until 1921, when Don Andris died, the proved family history was as follows: -

He married one Balahamy, with the procession, the giving of gifts, and other ceremonials familiar to the law of Ceylon. There was, however, one omission, namely, that the- marriage was not registered, and in that sense the marriage was irregular. But registration, however important, was not by law essential. Don

Andris and she Jived together as apparently man and wife for these twenty years. During that period she bore him nine children, of whom eight are still alive. The father and mother and children ail lived together sis one family. At the time of his death she and the eight surviving children were living in the family house.

By the law of intestate succession in Ceylon, the estate of the deceased would have been divided, one-half to his widow and the other half equally among the nine children, namely, her eight, and the respondent, the child of the first marriage.

The respondents claim that this law of succession operates.

The appellants, however-Singho Appu and his wife-deny to the respondents any such light of .succession. They maintained that Balahamy was not the wife of Don Andris, and that all her children were illegitimate. They accordingly claim that Dinohamy succeeded to the whole estate.

In the circumstances mentioned it is not to be wondered at that, when on December 14, 1921, letters of administration were granted to the appellant, Singho Appu, as son-in-law of the deceased and husband of Dinohamy the daughter by the first marriage, he considered it expedient to do something to fortify a claim to the estate. For the result of success in his application would be that the appellants would be able to disinherit and eject from the family home the first respondent and her eight children. A deed, purporting to be a deed of agreement, was accordingly prepared. It was made ready by December 18, namely, four days after letters of administration, and it was executed on December 23.

It is sufficient to say of that deed that the estat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document