SARDAR NOWROJI PUDUMJI Vs. PUTLIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs are the executors of the will of their deceased brother Sorabji Pudumji, who died on the nth of January 1910. On the 10th of December 1898, twelve years before his death, Sorabji executed his will. That will was made not long after the death of his wife ; and this misfortune seems to have had a most distressing effect upon his mind. He was a man of intelligence and education, having been for many years a Judicial Officer of high standing in the service of Government. The provisions of his will at first sight appear to be very complicated and in some instances are inconsistent with each other. It seems to me that the extreme distress of mind consequent on the death of his wife is solely responsible for the rather tangled document which he has left behind him in which he makes testamentary dispositions of his property amongst his four children who are defendants herein. After the execution of his will, the testator acquired both moveable and immoveable property and in some instances altered the character of his investments. Instead, however, of making a fresh will or a codicil, he from time to time made marginal notes and alterations on his original will. Such notes and " alterations being unattested could not be admitted to probate, and the will admitted to probatels the will, as he originally made it twelve years before his death. The testator has left three daughters and a son ; and he has given directions and made dispositions in his will which presented difficulties to r 45 the executors, who have taken out this originating summons, wherein they have submitted several questions for the Court s consideration and directions. The summons was adjourned by me into Court and all parties have been fully heard on all questions raised in the suit.

(2.) In order to avoid any possible misunderstanding as to the construction I put on the various clauses of the will, I have thought it desirable to write a judgment, giving my reasons for the interpretation and construction of the various clauses of the will, before formally answering the questions which are submitted to the Court in the summons. In the third clause of the will, the testator says :- My dear daughter Putlibai, when she attains her majority and gets possession of her portion of the legacy, to be a there of ex officio joint executrix with the then existing pair.

(3.) The plaintiffs ask whether defendant No. 1, Putlibai, is entitled to be co- executrix with them and, if so, when ? In construing the will of a Parsee, drawn by himself, it appears to me to be unnecessary to put a very strict or technical construction on every word or phrase, which go to make up any particular direction in that will. What the Court has to do is to ascertain the true intention of the testator from the whole clause. The whole will is distinguished b)r the use of diffuse language and expressions loosely strung together throughout. It appears to me that the testator intended that his eldest child Putlibai should have a voice in the management and disposition of his estate, when she attained majority and became entitled to the payment of her legacy. As she has now attained majority and become entitled to be paid or given possession of a very substantial portion of the property bequeathed to her by the testator, I am of opinion that she is entitled to be co-executrix with the plaintiffs and that she is so entitled now without waiting for the possession of the whole of her legacy. The plaintiffs do not actively object to her being associated with them in the administration of her father s estate, but it was stated to me that there was apprehension of possible conflict, judging from the attitude adopted by her in correspondence. Putlibai is married to a solicitor of this Court, in whose discretion and good sense I have great confidence. She is herself a member of one of the most respectable Parsee families, and I have no doubt is well brought up with proper notions of respect towards her elders; and I have every reason to believe that in the discharge of the duties with which she will be entrusted, her conduct towards the C plaintiffs will be all that is expected of a young lady in her position in life.