MANIKAM PILLAI Vs. VENKATESA CHETTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Kuppi Chetti devised by his Will dated 15 May 1907, his moveable property and immovable properties to three persons subject to the life interest of his wife and his brother's widow. Subramaniam Chetti one of the legatees mortgaged his share of the property devised to him to the plaintiff under Ex. A on 22 June, 1908. The plaintiff has brought the suit on the mortgage and the contention of the defendant is, that inasmuch as Subramaniam Chetti died in the lifetime of Meenakshi Ammal, the widow of the testator, the legacy did not vest in him and the plaintiff could, therefore, have no remedy against the property. The District Munsif decreed the plaintiff's suit; but the Subordinate Judge of Cuddalore dismissed it. The plaintiff has preferred this second appeal.

(2.) The only question in this second appeal, is what did the testator mean by the following clause should any of the aforesaid persons, viz., Subramaniam Chettiar or minor Venkatesam mentioned above die, the survivor shall get the properties of the deceased and enjoy them with power to sell or gift them away.

(3.) The District Munsif relying upon Section 111 of the Indian Succession Act, held, that the clause related to the death of Subramaniam Chetti or of minor Venkatesam Chetti during the lifetime of the testator. The Subordinate Judge held that the period contemplated by the testator was the death of the life-tenants. The learned Advocate-General for the appellants contended that Section 111 is a rule of law which is applicable to all Wills and, therefore, the clause must be taken to refer to the death of Subramaniam Chetti or Venkatesam Chetti during the lifetime of the testator.