Legal necessity for widow's alienation requires proof that no other assets were available to meet debts and marriage expenses.

A widow's sale of mortgaged property could be upheld only if it was shown to be for legal necessity, including discharge of the usufructuary mortgage. Although a widow could incur debt for her own liabilities and for the marriage expenses of her daughter and grand-daughter, the alienation still had to be supported by proof that the required funds could not be raised from other available properties. The burden rested on the defendants to show the absence of alternative assets, and in the absence of such evidence the sale was not justified. The purchasers could, however, redeem by payment of the mortgage amount with interest within the time allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sale executed by the widow could be upheld as a valid alienation for legal necessity, including discharge of the usufructuary mortgage, and whether the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the property on payment of the mortgage amount.

Analysis: The widow was competent to incur debt for her own liabilities and for the marriage expenses of her daughter and grand-daughter. However, the sale could be justified only if it was shown that the necessary funds could not be raised from other available properties. The burden lay on the defendants to prove that no other property was available to meet the expenses and discharge the debts. As no such evidence was produced, the sale of the mortgaged property for payment of the mortgage amount was not justified.

Conclusion: The plaintiffs were entitled to recover the property on payment of Rs. 2,000 with interest on Rs. 1,100 at 12% per annum with yearly rests from the date of sale until tender, and time was allowed for redemption.

---