BHASKARAN PILLAI Vs. NARAYANAN AAAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPEAL by defendants 1 & 2.

(2.) ONE Govinda Pillai, who was a Head Constable and after retirement a Vakil in Criminal Courts, had three fixed deposits in the travancore Forward Bank, Ltd. under receipts Exts. D2, D3, and D4. The appellants claimed the amounts of those deposits as given to them under his last will, Ext. D8; and the respondents claim them as heirs on intestacy. The 1st plaintiff was his widow, the 2nd plaintiff is his nephew through a sister, and the 1st defendant a nephew and the 2nd defendant a niece through another sister. The 1st plaintiff died pending suit and additional plaintiffs 3 to 11, her grand children by pre-deceased daughter, have been substituted in her place. The Subordinate Judge found against the appellants, and decreed one half the suit amounts to plaintiffs 3 to 11 and the other half to Govinda Pillai's tavazhi inclusive of the 2nd plaintiff and the appellants. This appeal is against that decree.

(3.) S. 142 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, defines a specific legacy thus: "where a testator bequeaths to any person a specified part of his property, which is distinguished from all other parts of his property, the legacy is said to be specific. " and among the Illustrations given by the legislature are: "2,000 rupees which I have in the hands of C"; "all my shares in the Imperial Bank of India. " There cannot be any doubt that the legacy of the amount in deposit in the Paravoor Anchal Savings Bank and the amount due under the decree in O. S. No. 141 of 1123 are specific legacies.