Ausadahamy Et Al. V. Tikiri Banda

1950 Present .Nagalingam J. and Pulle J.

AUSADAHAMY et al, Appellants, and TIKIRI BANDA,

Respondent

S. C. 234-D. C. Kurunegala, 5,155

Kandyan Law Declaration and Amendment Ordinance, No. 39 of 1938-Inheritance -Rights of childless Kandyan widow to life interest in. acquired property of deceased husband-Meaning of "acquired property"-Retrospective effect of Ordinance-Sections 10, 11, 26.

M gifted certain immovable property to his son U in 1908. U gifted it in 1917 to his son P. P, who was a Kandyan, died in 1943, intestate and issueless leaving him surviving his widow, his brother and another.

Held, that the property in the hands of P was " acquired property " and that on his death his widow became entitled to a life interest over it.

Per NAGALINGAM J-" I am therefore of opinion that the term ' acquired property ' as used in the proviso to sub-section (1) (of section 10 of the Kandyan Law Declaration and Amendment Ordinance) has not the same meaning as that term has in sub-section (3) and that clauses (b) and (c) of Sub-section (1) are not retrospective in their operation. The term " acquired property " in the proviso must

Click Here to Read the rest of this document