High CourtsDivision Bench

In Re: Monohur Mookerjee

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 17 May 1880 · Citation: (1880) ILR (Cal) 756

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tottenham, J · Jackson, J

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

1 paragraphs · 180 words

Jackson, J.—This reference was not properly made by the District Judge. It is not a case in which Section 617 authorised a reference to the High Court, as the Judge''s order, if made, would not be final; but the learned Advocate-General has asked the Court to take his case up as a Court of concurrent jurisdiction, and, under the circumstances, we have consented to do so. The point appears to us clear enough. The clauses of the will which have been read to us indicate, without doubt, that Monohur Mookerjee is a person--to use the words of Wilde, J., In the goods of Baylis (L.R. 1 P. & M. 21)--who was authorised "to receive and pay the debts of the testator and to get in all the personal estate," and he has been given full powers for that purpose to collect and receive all debts and manage the estate for the period of nine years, after the expiry of which he is to distribute it to the various legatees in the manner directed. We think he is entitled to probate.