MANORAMA DASSI Vs. KALI CHARAN BANERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Guru Prosanna Ghose died on the 18 January 1901, leaving the plaintiff his only daughter surviving him.

(2.) The present suit is brought for-the purpose of determining certain questions which arise on the construction of his will.

(3.) The first question is with reference to a devise of a house No. 47 Baniapooker Road. It is directed that the plaintiff shall be entitled to the rents and profits of that house for her life subject to her keeping the same in repair; the rates and taxes having to be paid out of the testator's estate. No express provision is to be found in the will as to what will happen to the house in question on the determination of the plaintiff's life estate, but there is a provision directing the executors, after carrying out the provisions of the will, to sell the residue of such of the estate as consists of landed property and to make over the proceeds thereof to the University of Calcutta. In my opinion the reversion in No. 47, Baniapooker Road, expectant on the determination of the plaintiff's life interest passes under the specific residuary devise in favour of the University of Calcutta, and that the executors must sell the same and apply the proceeds as directed in the provisions of the will in favour of the University of Calcutta.