Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

35. The law on this subject has been discussed in a number of rulings of the Bombay and Madras High Courts and I may refer here to a judgment of the former Court reported as Ravji v. Lakhshmibai (1887) 11 Bom 381. In the course of the judgment the learned Judge referring to West and Buhler remarks that agreements depriving an adopted son of his immediate right of inheritance are inadmissible in accordance with strict Hindu law, but are not uncommon in practice and have been upheld by the Courts, custom and practice have moulded the law and fair arrangements for the protection of the widow's interest during her life are allowed. The question in all cases is whether the stipulations are reasonable. If they are unreasonable, such as giving the widow absolute powers of disposition over the property, they should be rejected. As an instance in which a condition imposed by the widow was rejected as unreasonable, I may refer to the case of Venkappa v. Fakir Gowda (1906) 8 Bom LR 346. There the agreement made by the adoptive mother with the natural parent was one by which she took power to give away a portion of her husband's estate to her own brother. It was held that the condition was unreasonable and the gift void and the adopted son was held entitled to recover the property. There are not many cases of this description to be found in the reports of the Courts of these Provinces. There is one in Kali Das v. Bijai Shankar (1891) 13 All 391 in which an arrangement by the widow that she should remain as manager of the estate for her life was upheld.