Terrell A-G CJ:

The facts and arguments sufficiently appear from the judgment.

The deceased, who died on 21 May 1933, intestate, was the wife of the applicant to whom letters of administration were granted on 9 September 1933. The beneficiaries under Mohammedan Law are the applicants and the deceased's seven children three of whom are still infants. The only asset remaining in the estate is an undivided half share in two pieces of land in the Changi district of Singapore having a total area of under four acres. It is to the interest of the beneficiaries that this property should be realised as they cannot reasonably enjoy their interests as tenants in common of an undivided half share, such interests being fractional.

The question arises as to the proper procedure to be adopted. It has been said that when an executor or administrator has paid all the debts and administration expenses the administration is at an end and he becomes a trustee of the deceased's effects in specie for the beneficiaries or next of kin as the case may be (Re Ponder [1921] 2 Ch 59). On the other hand it has been decided in an Irish case Re Norwood & Blalis Contract [1917] 1 Jr r. 472 that the executors' or administrators' powers of disposal continue for the purpose of distribution also, and there can be no doubt that in this Colony this view has been adopted, and grants de bonis non have frequently been made many years after all the debts and administration expenses have been paid, and merely for the purpose of facilitating distribution. In the case of small estates this practice has much to recommend it. I do not say that this is the only procedure that can be adopted. Where an administrator has completed the administration and becomes invested with the character of trustee, an application under the Trustees Ordinance could clearly be made. In the present case the administrator's powers of disposal can be regarded as subsisting, subject to the provisions of s. 35 sub-section 2 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Ordinance.

In view of this section, as more than six years have elapsed since the death of the intestate, no sale can be effected by the administrator without the sanction of the Court, and the present application is made to obtain such sanction. The sanction of the Court is not granted as a matter of course or upon an ex parte application, and one or more of the beneficiaries should always be made respondents to the summons. The Court may require to be satisfied as to the reasons for the delay, and will in every case where infants are interested require an affidavit of value so as to ensure that the property is not being sold at an undervalue.

If, however, the Court is satisfied on these points the sanction will be given. The resulting sale will not be a sale by the Court, but a sale by the administrator with the sanction of the Court. Order 48 r. 2 (sale altogether out of Court) has no application, and accordingly the order authorising the administrator to exercise his powers does not require the declaration referred to in O. 48 r. 3.

In the case before me the only offer to purchase is from three of the adult beneficiaries who have offered $1,000, the valuation being $1,200. If the offer is increased to the amount of the valuation, the necessary sanction can be given.

Order accordingly.