https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292662 The Privy Council held that the eldest son did not become a co-sharer with his father in the estate under Mitakshara law and the custom of primogeniture. The inalienability of the estate depended on custom, which was not proven. The absence of evidence of alienation was insufficient to establish a custom of inalienability. Consequently, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the gift should be invalidated. The Privy Council advised overturning the lower courts' decrees and dismissing the suit with costs. en-us Sat, 21 Jan 1888 00:00:00 +0521 Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:48:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292662 The Privy Council held that the eldest son did not become a co-sharer with his father in the estate under Mitakshara law and the custom of primogeniture. The inalienability of the estate depended on custom, which was not proven. The absence of evidence of alienation was insufficient to establish a custom of inalienability. Consequently, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the gift should be invalidated. The Privy Council advised overturning the lower courts' decrees and dismissing the suit with costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 21 Jan 1888 00:00:00 +0521 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292662