Nagalingam Pillai vs Vaduganatha Asari And Anr. on 21 January, 1918

JUDGMENT

1. It has been held in Kamakshi v. Nagarathnam 5 M.H.C.R. 161 that in the dancing girl caste daughters succeed in preference to sons, and Strange in his Manual of Hindu Law says that the property of a dancing girl will pass to her female issue first and then to her male issue as in the case of other females. Although the property is not Stridhanam, its devolution is by custom similar to the devolution of Stridhanam. Consequently a daughter’s daughter must be preferred to a son, just as in ordinary Hindu Law a son’s son is preferred to a daughter, as in the latter sons have the preference over daughters. The District Judge is, therefore, right and this second appeal is dismissed with costs.