Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. It has been contended before us, and certain general dicta of the Privy Council have been referred to, to the effect that testamentary capacity is co extensive with the right of making gifts inter vivos. That that principle has not a universal application is shown by the decision of the Privy Council in Lakshman Dada Naik v. Ram chandra Dada Naik 5 B. 48 (P.C.) : 7 I.A. 181 : 4 Sar. P.C.J. 173 : 3 Suth. P.C.J. 778 : 3 Shome L.R. 217 : 4 Ind. Jur. 472 : 7 C.L.R. 320 : 3 Ind. Dec (N.S. ) 34, which expressly approved the decision of the Madras High Court to which I have just referred. At that time the view that prevailed in the Madras High Court was that a co-parcener might, during his lifetime, make a gift of his undivided share (a view which has since has been overruled) and the Madras High Court held in Vitla Butten v. Yamenamma 8 M.H.C.R. 6 that, in spite of that he could not dispose of his undivided share by Will. The Privy Council in the case in Lakshman Dada Naik v. Ramchandra Dada Naik 5 B. 48 (P.C.) : 7 I.A. 181 : 4 Sar. P.C.J. 173 : 3 Suth. P.C.J. 778 : 3 Shome L.R. 217 : 4 Ind. Jur. 472 : 7 C.L.R. 320 : 3 Ind. Dec (N.S. ) 34, says with reference to the case;