143-NLR-NLR-V-24-CRACKLAW-v.-UKKURALA.pdf
( 476 )
1922.
Preeeni; Ennis and Schneider JJ.
CRACKLAW r. TJKKURALA.
110—D. C. Kegalla, 5,895.
Lease by heir toho was administrator in his capacity as heir—Right ofcreditor to seize and sell property.
Where a person who was heir and administrator leased a propertyin his capacity as heir of the deceased person to a third party—
Held, that the lease was subject to the administrator's right tosell for the purpose of tho estate, and consequently that a creditorof the estate may seize and sell the same in execution.fJlHE facts appear from the judgment.
H. V. Perera, for appellant.
Keuneman, for respondent.
September 6, 1922. Ennis J.—
This is an appeal from an order in an action under section 247of the Civil Procedure Code, holding that a lease which had beenseized was liable to be sold in execution of a decree. The actionwas by the judgment-creditor against a successful claimant. Itappears that the lesae was seized as being the property of DingiriBanda, who had taken a lease in 1906. Dingiri Banda’s heir andadministrator executed the lease now under consideration onNovember 8, 1920, to defendant. This lease is D 1 filed in thecase. The document shows that the lessor acted for himself, hisheirs, executors, and administrators, and did not act as adminis-trator of the estate of Dingiri Banda. The learned Judge hasfound that, as against the creditors, the defendant cannot claimany rights on this conveyance. The land passed to him, subject,to the administrator’s right to sell for the purpose of the estate,and that right includes the right of a creditor who has seized theproperty in payment of his debt (Gopalasamy v. liamasamypulle).1I would accordingly dismiss the appeal, with costs.
Schnbideu J.—I agree.
Appeal dismissed.
1 (19/0 Id N. L. B. £38.