Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bai Vijli Vs. Bai Prabhalakshmi

Bai Vijli vs Bai Prabhalakshmi

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Aug 28, 1907
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/342157

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Second Appeal No. 494 of 1906
Subject
Family

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Hindu law-Succession-Grandson of mother's sister-Son's daughter of the sister of the paternal grand-father-Priority between.;Under Hindu law, the grand-son of the mother's sister (maternal aunt) of the propositus is entitled to succeed in preference to the daughter of the son of the sister of the paternal grand-fath...

Key legal issue
Family

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bai Vijli

Respondent

Bai Prabhalakshmi

Legal References

Reported In
(1907)9BOMLR1129

Excerpt

hindu law-succession-grandson of mother's sister-son's daughter of the sister of the paternal grand-father-priority between.;under hindu law, the grand-son of the mother's sister (maternal aunt) of the propositus is entitled to succeed in preference to the daughter of the son of the sister of the paternal grand-father - louis p. russell, atg. c.j.1. i append a pedigree which sets out the relationship of the parties herein.2. the question in this case is whether the plaintiffs have preference over the grandson of the maternal aunt of the propositus. both the lower courts have held that girjashankar is one of the atma bandhus of the propositus, thereby following the decision of the present chief justice and mr. justice batty in sha chamanlal v. dhosi ganesh ilr (1904) 28 bom. 453. in spite of the brave endeavour on the part of mr. setlur to argue that that case differs from the present one, we are unable to find that it does so. we are of opinion that the principle applied in that case must govern the present one.3. we are, therefore, of opinion that the decree of the lower appellate court, which upheld the decree of the lower court, must be confirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

Louis P. Russell, Atg. C.J.

1. I append a pedigree which sets out the relationship of the parties herein.

2. The question in this case is whether the plaintiffs have preference over the grandson of the maternal aunt of the propositus. Both the lower Courts have held that Girjashankar is one of the atma bandhus of the propositus, thereby following the decision of the present Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Batty in Sha Chamanlal v. Dhosi Ganesh ILR (1904) 28 Bom. 453. In spite of the brave endeavour on the part of Mr. Setlur to argue that that case differs from the present one, we are unable to find that it does so. We are of opinion that the principle applied in that case must govern the present one.

3. We are, therefore, of opinion that the decree of the lower appellate Court, which upheld the decree of the lower Court, must be confirmed and the appeal dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial