The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of interpreting a will based on the intention of the testator and the prevailing notions in the community, as well as the presumption that a gift or disposition in favor of all the members of a Kavaru is in favor of the Kavaru with the incidents of Aliyasanthana law.

( 1 ) - The only point that arises for consideration in this Miscellaneous Second Appeal is -"whether the bequest under the will executed by Guruvappa on 23/01/1931 was in favour of K. Babu Rao, Jaka Bai, Vasudeva Rao and Seethu or was it in favour of the entire Kavaru of Seethu with the incidents of law of Aliyasanthana?".

( 2 ) ON 22-1-1931 one Guruvappa resident of Kodialbail village within the limits of Mangalore town executed a will Ex. P-1 bequething his movable and immovable properties. In Ex. P-1, he states that he is a retired Sharaff of Imperial Bank and a person following Aliyasanthana System of Law, that he has not derived any benefit from his Aliyasanthana family and that the properties that are subject-matter of the will were all his self-acquisitions and that he has been enjoying the same as such. He cancels an earlier will executed by him on 12-11-1991 and stipulates that his son Ram Mohan by his deceased first wife and his Aliyasanthana heirs are not entitled to inherit any of his properties. After stating so, he bequethes the properties described under the will Ex. P-1 to his second wife Seethu, his children by her, namely, Jaka Bai, Babu Rao, Vasudeva Rao and also to his children by Seethu to be born thereafter. He states that these persons should enjoy the said properties independently, absolutely and for generation to generation. But, he stipulates that none of them have right to incur debts and encumber the said properties and if they do so, they are personally liable to discharge the same. He also stipulates that if after his death, his second wife Seethu contracts remarriage or enters into a fresh relationship (Sammanda) according to "tulu Practice", then the rights created in her favour under the will shall stand forfeited and that only his children born to Seethu Hengsu shall have rights in the properties thereafter.

( 3 ) WHILE interpreting a will, the court has to endeavour to ascertain the intentions of the testator. This intention has to be gathered primarily from the language of the document which is to be read as a whole. The court also must consider the surrounding circumstances, the position of the testator, his family relationship, the probability that he would use words in a particular sense and many other things which are often summed up in the somewhat picturesque figure 'the Court is entitled to put itself into the testator's armchair. ' But all this is solely as an aid to arriving at a right construction of the will. The duty of the court is to carry out the intention as expressed and none other, as laid down in the case reported in Gnambal Ammal v. T. Raju Ayyar, AIR 1951 SC 103.

( 4 ) SHRI B. V. Acharya, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants, contends that in Ex. P-1 will, the four named persons inherited the properties as tenants-in-common as the will Ex. P-1 clearly confers equal absolute rights on them, that the the bequest in favour of Seethu is a conditional one and that the parties by conduct have treated the properties as having been owned by them as tenants-in-common.

( 5 ) SHRI B. P. Holla, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, strongly disputes these contentions and submits that the disposition under the will was in favour of the entire Kavaru of Seethu Hengsu with all incidents of Aliyasanthana law.

( 6 ) IT is not in dispute that Seethu and her children named in the will constituted a Kavaru under the Aliyasanthana system of law. The will was executed in the year 1931. In Nemiraja Pergade v. Kamalu Hengsu, 1963 Mys LJ (Suppl) 588, Hegde, J. (as he then was) observes "while construing a gift deed or a will it is necessary to bear in mind the ordinary notions that are likely to influence the donor, viz. , the system of law which governs the donor, the prevailing notions in the community to which the donor belongs and his or her likely inclinations. "

( 7 ) UNDER the Aliyasanthana system of Law, where a gift or disposition is made