The Calcutta Law Journal May 16 1914

On the 19th of January of the same year in the presence of the vakeels of plaintiff and the defendant Ram Kishen on the part of Mohendur Narayan Ray and Runjeet Roy on the part of Lachmynarayan Roy both canongo mohurrars being asked if „they can furnish a geneological table of the zerriRdary of purganah Okra &c. [...] On Thursday the 13th of May of the same year the plaintiffs' vakeel informed the Court in the presence of the defendants' vakeel that his constituent having seen the opinions of the three Pundits required to know upon what books those (1) In this connection consider the present rule relating to proof of Wills."VOL. [...] Being asked which of the eight books in question is considered the best authority they replied that in the present case Day Bhaug is : On the 15th of June of the same year the plaintiff's vakeel in the presence of the defendant's vakeel is asked ; if on the day on which the Pundits delivered in the two papers before mentioned his constituent had heard the purport of them. [...] This Regulation was passed as mentioned in the preanible to provide for cases where the deceased had left a will but this Regulation by laying down the rule that the executors were competent to administer the estate of the 'testator without applying f3r and having the probate of the will delayed the devolopment of Law of Testamentary power of Hindus for nearly a century till the passinof [...] For since the gift of the entire estate to a stranger would have been valid (however blameable the act of the giver might be) the donation in fovour of one son with provisfon for the support of the rest would seem to be eqally valid according to the doctrines received in the province of Bengal.