HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0601 and id is 1 raw text is: CHUOTURYA R. M. SYN V. SAHUB PUR. SYN [1857] VII MOORE IND. APP., 19
CHUOTURYA RUN MURDUN SYN,-Appellant; SAHUB PURHULAD SYN.-
Respondent * [Nov. 27, 28, and 30, and Dec. 8, 1857].
On appeal from the Sudder Dewan/my Adawlut at Calcutta.
An illegitimate son of a Khatri, one of the three regenerate castes, by a Soodra
women, cannot by the Hindoo law of inheritance, succeed to the inheritance
of his putative father; but he is entitled to maintenance out of his deceased
father's estate [7 Moo. Ind. App. 50, 51].
So held in the case of a disputed succession to the Rajdom and Zemindary of
Ramnuggur, in the Presidency of Bengal, the Rajah last seized, the putative
father, being a Rajpoot of the Khatri class.
Secua. In the case of the Soodra class, illegitimate children being qualified to
inherit.
Inquiry into the history of the Khatri class. Such class held not to have lost
caste and sunk into the Soodra class [7 Moo. Ind. App. 45, et seq.].
The Rajpoots of Central India, and in the District where the Rajdom of Ram-
nuggur is situate, held to be of the Khatri class, and that the right of suc-
cession to the Raj and Zemindary was to be determined by the laws and
customs of that class.
The question in this appeal involved the right of succession to a Raj ; the issue
raised being, whether [19] the Appellant was, according to the Hindoo law and right
of caste, entitled to succeed to the Rajdom and Zemindary of Ramnuggur, in the
District of Sarun, in the Presidency of Bengal.
The circumstances out of which the appeal arose were as follow:-
The late Rajah Umur Purtab Syn died on the 26th of November, 1834, being at
the time of his death in the undisputed possession of the estate, the right to which
formed the subject-matter of this appeal. He was the half brother of Rajah Tej
Purtab Syn, who died on the 1st of June, 1832, leaving three widows, Maharanee
Telotman Dabee, Ranea Shree Kanta Dabee, and Ranee Tej Koomaree Dabee, him
surviving. Soon after his death, his widow, Maharanee Telotman Dabee, asserted
a claim to the whole of the Rajdom, by virtue of a deed of gift alleged to have been
executed by her husband in his lifetime; and a dispute having arisen between her
and the late Rajah Umur Purtab Syn, as to the right of succession to the Rajdom
and Zemindary, such dispute was ultimately compromised by the Maharanee Telot-
man Dabee agreeing to accept during her life the revenue of thirty-nine of the
villages belonging to the Rajdom and Zemindary for her maintenance, and she
thereupon withdrew her claim to the rest of the property.
The late Rajah Umur Purtab Syn was a Rajpoot, and had, as it was alleged, three
wives. By the first alleged wife, Ranee Lutchmee Dya Dabee, who predeceased him,
he had one son, the Appellant. This marriage was denied by the Respondent, and
that fact was one of the questions in dispute. He had no children by his two other
wives, one only of whom, Ranee Umun Raj Lutchmee Dabee, survived him. For
[20J several months previous to his death, the Rajah, being unequal to the transac-
tion of public business, with the view of providing for the efficient discharge of the
duties of the Rajdom, formally invested the Appellant co-ordinately with himself
with all proper authority for the conduct and management of the affairs of the Raj-
dom. For about three weeks previously to his death, the Rajah was both physically
and mentally incapable of any effort. Upon his death, the Appellant performed
his obsequies. His widow, Ranee Umur Raj Lutchmee Dabee's name was entered
on the Collector's books as heir, and she entered into the possession and beneficial
occupation of the Rajdom, and continued in such occupation until her death, which
event took place on the 24th of February, 1840. Shortly after her death, the Col-
lector of the District was directed to keep the estate under attachment until the
Present: The Right Hon. The Lord Justice Knight Bruce, the Right Hon. T.
Pemberton Leigh, the Right Hon. Sir Edward Ryan, and the Right Hon. The Lord
Justice Turner.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0601&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)