Kumaraswami Sastri, J.

1. The plaintiff who is the appellant sued to recover Es. 4,534-13-3 alleged to be due on a promissory note executed by the deceased Kothai Ammal, the widow and executrix under the will of one Narasimhachari who died leaving another widow, two daughters and a daughters son (defendants 1 to 4 respectively). The case for the plaintiff is that the promissory note sued on was executed in respect of moneys borrowed by the executrix to pay the legacy due to the 3rd defendant and that defendants 1 to 4 who have taken the testators property and defendants 2 to 4 who have succeeded to Kothai Ammals properties are liable. Various defences were raised but it is only necessary to consider the plea that the executrix had no power or necessity to borrow so as to bind the estate of the testator and the plaintiff can only proceed against Kothai Ammals heirs and the assets in their hands.

2. The Subordinate Judge held that under the terms of the will the proceeds of the life policy (referred to in paragraph 8 of the will) were specified as the fund out of which the legacy was to be paid, that there was no necessity to borrow and that the estate of the testator was not b