Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Munro and Sankaran Nair, JJ.
Sennayan Chetty
Versus
Sinnappan Servai
Decided On : 23.03.1910
Trusteeship - Devolution of trusteeship - Interpretation of partition-deed provision
Fact of the Case:
The partition-deed, Exhibit A, did not contain provisions for renunciation of trusteeship and appointment of a successor, and did not establish hereditary trusteeship.
Finding of the Court:
The second appeal was dismissed with costs.
Issues: Interpretation of the provision in the partition-deed regarding devolution of trusteeship.
Ratio Decidendi: The court analyzed the language of the partition-deed and found no provision for renunciation of trusteeship or appointment of a successor, and no indication of hereditary trusteeship.
Final Decision: The second appeal was dismissed with costs.
1. The only provision in the partition-deed, Exhibit A, as to the devolution of the trusteeship, is that "after the life-time of the aforesaid Venkataraman Chetti the senior-most member for the time being shall manage the properties endowed." There is no provision for the renunciation of the trusteeship by Venkataraman Chettiar and for the appointment by him of his successor. It does not appear from Exhibit A that this is a case of hereditary trusteeship.
2. The second appeal is dismissed with costs.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
