Judgement

APPEAL from a decree of the High Court (Sept. 1, 1869) which reversed a decree of Phear, J. (April 1, 1869) dismissing the suit, and granted part of the relief sought.

Besides the Plaintiff Ganendromohun Tag ore, two of the Defendants also appealed, viz., Juttendromohun Tagore (one of the executors) and Sourendromohun Tagore, both claiming beneficial interests under the will. The three appeals were consolidated and heard upon one printed case on behalf of each party.

The facts of the case and the will of Prosonocoomar Tagore are sufficiently set forth in the judgment of their Lordships.

Joshua Williams, Q.C., and J. D. Bell, for Ganendromohun Tagore.

Sir R. Palmer, Q.C., Forsyth, Q.C., Cochrane, Leith, and Doyne, for Juttendromohun and Sourendromohun.

It appears from the printed cases that it was contended on behalf of Ganendromohun that no bequest can be made by a Hindu, even in Bengal, which is inconsistent with the Hindu law affecting gifts. The judgments of Lord Kingsdown and Lord Justice Knight-Bruce in Nagalutchmee Ummal v. Gopoo Nadaraja Chetty (6 Moores Ind. Ap. Ca. 344.) and in Soorjeemonee Dossee v. Denobundhoo Mullick (9 Moores Ind. Ap. Ca. 135.) were referred