SURENDRA NATH PRAMANIK Vs. AMRITA LAL PAL CHAUDHURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are directed against two orders made in a Probate proceeding, one for fresh security to be furnished by the executors, another for cancellation of the Probate on the refusal of the executors to comply with the order for fresh security. The events which led up to these two orders may he briefly recited.

(2.) One Manohar Pal Chaudhuri made a testamentary disposition of his properties and died on the 9th September 1909. The executors named in the Will applied for Probate on the 5th December 1909 in the Court of the District Judge of Nadia. The Will was proved in due course, and on the 31st January 1910, the District Judge made the following order: Will proved; application for Probate granted; bond for Rs. 16,000 with two sureties to be filed on or before 2nd March 1910.

(3.) The petitioners for Probate applied for and obtained an extension of time, and the bond filed on the 8th March was accepted on the 4th April 1910. Probate was thereafter made ready and delivered to the executors on the 6th April 1910. The executors apparently took possession of the estate op the authority conferred on them by the Probate, On the 15th February 1919 the beneficiaries presented an application to the District Judge, stating that one of the sureties to the bond had become insolvent, that the other had heavily mortgaged his properties, and that for the protection of the estate, which, it was asserted, was maladministered, it was essential that the executors should be called upon to give fresh sureties. The Court, after notice to all parties concerned, held an enquiry, and on the 15th February 1919 recorded that the security given by the executors was no longer sufficient, inasmuch as one of the sureties had become bankrupt and the other had heavily mortgaged his properties. The District Judge accordingly ordered the executors to furnish fresh security for Rs. 16,000 on or before 3rd March 1919. The executors applied to the Judge to review this order, but to no purpose. This was followed by an application for extension of time, which also was refused. On the 3rd March, the Court cancelled the grant and ordered the executors to return the Probate for cancellation without delay. We are invited in these appeals to consider the legality and propriety of the orders made on the 15th February and 3rd March 1919.