Executors' costs.

Sales by executors, &c.

The general rule is, that executors and administrators, like other trustees fairly conducting themselves, are entitled to their costs; and even if they take an erroneous course, if they appear to have acted only from a wish to discharge their trust and to benefit the parties beneficially interested, thé S. C. will, in its discretion, hold them to be entered entitled to their costs out of the estate. (2316, D. C. Jaffna, 13 Aug. 1850.) But not if they do not conduct themselves fairly; e. g. if an executor pleads a false plea (565, D. C. Mandr. 6 Jan. 1836; Morg. D. 71); or vexatiously opposes probate in his co-executor. (336, D. C. Matura; Lor. R. 27.)

In referring to sales by executors, it is not intended to go out of the scope of this chapter by entering on the duties of executors, &c. but the power of the District Court to enforce those duties.

An administrator is, in general, entitled to alienate or encumber the whole estate; and the proper remedy to prevent that, is, not by calling on the court to interfere with him, but by praying out an injunction. (4416, D. C. Chilaw and Putlam, 24 Oct. 1838: 277, D. C. Colombo, 31 May, 1842; Morg. D. pp. 252, 326.) Nevertheless, as a check against improper sales by administrators, the D. C. of Colombo inserts a provision in the letters of administration prohibiting the administrator from selling real property without leave of the court. (D. C. Galle, 584, 7 Apr. 1853; Coll.)

In one case an administrator obtained an order for

The

the sale of real property, which was opposed, not on the
grounds of his having funds in hand, or of no more
funds being wanted for the winding up of the estate, or
of there being moveable property which ought to be
disposed of first, but on an immense number of objec-
tions raised to his original right to administration, and
to his conduct since he had been administrator.
S. C. said if a man misconducts himself as administrator,
the court can, upon proper application and proof,
remove him, and should be applied to to do so. But,
as a general rule, his whole conduct should not be the
subject of adjudication in a proceeding such as the
above. There may be cases in which, in order to pre-
vent immediate mischief, and where the misconduct of
the administrator has only just come to the objector's
notice, the court may properly decline, or delay to
strengthen his hands in dealing with the estate. But,
as a general rule, it seems against principle and against
the true interest of all concerned, to keep a man in
office as administrator, and yet to cripple him in the
performance of his duty by not allowing him powers
which are necessary to wind up the estate. (421, D. C.

Caltura, 29 Sept. 1863.)

administra

An administration can be revoked, upon good grounds Revocation of being shown, or where they have issued by the mistake tion. of the court. It would not be good grounds for revoking administration given jointly to a widow and her brother, that the latter had no interest in the estate,

Re-granting administration.

Quarrelsome administra

tors.

and was not even authorized to apply for joint administration. But before an administration can be revoked, notice must be given to the administration already appointed to show cause against the revocation; and if he has given security, injunction and sequestration cannot in the mean time be issued against him. (119, 17 June, 1854, and 18469, 12 June, 1849, D. C. Kandy; Austin, pp. 230, 235: 8001, D. C. Kandy, 17 Feb. 1865.) Not filing final account, or settling the estate, combined with a precarious state of health, has been held good ground for removal and sequestration of the estates of the intestate, and the defaulting administrator and his sureties. (Marshall, 10.)

And administration cannot be re-granted until the former letters are revoked. (17328, D. C. Kandy, 12 June, 1849; Austin, 235.)

An administration given jointly to parties between whom there exists excessive bad feeling, cannot be advantageous to the administration. The D. C. should, in such case, make choice of one or other of the applicants, of course giving the preference to the spouse, unless good reason exists why other kindred should be preferred. The Supreme Court will be very slow to interfere with this appointment when made, as the D. C. must be the best judge of the matter. (12412, D. C. Chilaw and Putlam, 12 Nov. 1844.)

Where administrators have been appointed and differ, the D. C. should decide between them as between

two litigants with power to appeal, unless it can persuade them to arbitrate. (Marshall, 9.)

consent.

The District Court can, upon consent of the adminis- Revocation by trator and the heirs, revoke letters granted to the former, and appoint another administrator. The subsequent appointment cannot be set aside on the mere application of the previous administrator, on the ground that the re-grant was irregular for want of fresh citations. (479, D. C. Galle, 3 Dec. 1856; Lor. R. 241.)

INSOLVENCY JURISDICTION.

It was originally intended to add a chapter on the jurisdiction of the District Courts over the estates of insolvents; but, in view of the probable changes in respect of this subject, it was thought advisable to defer this part of the work to a later period, as it would only be needlessly enlarging the present volume.

CHAPTER XV.*

SUMMARY JURISDICTION OF THE DISTRICT COURTS.

THE preceding chapters describe the regular process of the District Courts; but it has been found necessary to establish a summary form of process for civil cases of undoubted urgency, and which it is the purpose of this chapter to set forth.

Deviations from the usual form of process are authorized in the cases following, under Supp. Rules of 5th March, 1838, p. 117:

1st. In all actions for the rent and hire of houses, with or without land, provided the same be situated within the limits of any town or station in which a District Court is established.

2dly. For the wages of domestic servants, artificers, or labourers, engaged by the year, or for any less period. 3dly. For the payment of seamen's wages, freight, or other maritime suits causing the detention of shipping.

* No doubt this process has fallen into some disuse; but the author cannot find that it has been anywhere recalled.