(13B) Daughter’s daughter.
(13C) Sister then half-sister.
(13D) Sister’s son.
(13E) Half-sister’s son.
We see from the table the following orders:
1. Son, 2. Grandson, 3.General Grandson, 4.Wife, 5. Daughter, 6. Daughter’s son, 7. Mother, 8. Father, 9. Brother, 10. Nephew, 11. Brother’s grandson, 12. Grandmother, 13. Grandfather, 13-A. Son’s daughter, 13-B. Daughter’s daughter, 13-C. Sister, 13-D.
Sister’s son, 13-E. Half Sister’s son, 14. Paternal uncle, 15. Paternal uncle’s son, 16. Paternal uncle’s son son’s son, 17. Father’s grandmother 18. Father’s grandfather, 19. Father’s paternal uncle, 20. Father’s paternal uncle’s son, 21. Father’s paternal uncle’s son’s son. 22. Brother’s son’s son. 23. Uncle’s son’s son, etc.
(b) A’s sister C is entitled to succeed to the estate of A because under the Hindu Law of Inheritance Amendment Act, which came into force in 1929 before the death of B, a sister has been recognised as an heir who succeeds before the paternal uncle in the order of succession.
Facts of Budha Singh v. Laltu Singh:
Saheb Sahay was the last male owner who died in 1873 leaving his mother who survived him. She died in 1907 when the succession opened to the male collaterals.
The diagram given below will illustrate the point.
It was held that the great grandson of the grandfather of the propositus is entitled to inherit in preferance to the grandson of the grandfather. So appeal of Budha Singh was dismissed. Although under Mitakshara law the right to inherit does not arise from the right to offer oblations, but when the contest is between the sagotra sapindas the test to be applied is the capacity to offer oblations.