Skip to content


Girindra Chandra Sen Vs. Mahesh Ram Deb and on His Death His Heirs and Legal Representatives Dasarath Chandra Deb (Dhar) and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in56Ind.Cas.170
AppellantGirindra Chandra Sen
RespondentMahesh Ram Deb and on His Death His Heirs and Legal Representatives Dasarath Chandra Deb (Dhar) and
Excerpt:
will, construction of - intention of testator--estates taken by devisees. - .....respectively, both the sons and the grandson were given full maliki right. it is true that restrictions were imposed on the power of alienation, but these restrictions appear not only in the case of the sons, but also in the case of the grandson. we do not think, upon a construction of the will as a whole, that the testator intended to give a life-estate to the sons and confer an absolute estate on the grandson, as contended for on behalf of the appellant. it seems to us that the intention of the testator was to grant an absolute estate to the sons and the grandson, though an attempt appears to have been made to restrict the power of alienation in the case of both.4. on the whole, we are not satisfied that the courts below have come to a wrong conclusion as regards the construction.....
Judgment:

1. The question involved in this appeal is--what was the interest which the sons of Golak, the testator, got under his Will.

2. The Courts below have come to the conclusion that an absolute interest was given to them under the will.

3. It appears that although there is some difference in the expressions used with reference to the right granted to the sons and to the grandson after the death of the sons, respectively, both the sons and the grandson were given full maliki right. It is true that restrictions were imposed on the power of alienation, but these restrictions appear not only in the case of the sons, but also in the case of the grandson. We do not think, upon a construction of the Will as a whole, that the testator intended to give a life-estate to the sons and confer an absolute estate on the grandson, as contended for on behalf of the appellant. It seems to us that the intention of the testator was to grant an absolute estate to the sons and the grandson, though an attempt appears to have been made to restrict the power of alienation in the case of both.

4. On the whole, we are not satisfied that the Courts below have come to a wrong conclusion as regards the construction of the Will. The result is that the appeal is dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //