RUSTOMJEE HEERJEEBHOY Vs. COWASJEE DADABHOY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This was an originating summons filed by one trustee against his co-trustees for the determination of the following question: Whether the defendants should not be ordered to execute a deed of appointment appointing Dinshaw, D. Romer as a trustee of the premises mentioned in the deed of declaration, dated the 6 June 1919, referred to in the plaint in place and stead of Cowasjee Maneckjee Rustomjee deceased.

(2.) At the hearing of the summons the 2nd defendant was absent, while counsel appeared for the plaintiff the 1 and 3 defendants respectively.

(3.) The answer to the question was that the defendants were bound to execute a deed of appointment. The costs of plaintiff and third defendant as between attorney and client were to come out of trust funds, and the 1 defendant was directed to bear his own costs.